Re: [Phono-L] Columbia Grafonola - electric motor question
Ron has a good point. Most of the early electric motors that were used in the first electrified phonographs were of the "universal" type. I seem to remember seeing this type in the early Columbia electrics. Meaning they had windings of wire in both the armature and in the stator magnets. This is unlike the pure induction motors that were typically used by Victor in this period. The rotor of an induction motor has no obvious wire in the rotor that comprises a winding, so it's generally easy to identify it as an induction motor. The armature of a universal motor has a commutator with electrical contact brushes that is required to switch and energize the several sections of the armature at the correct times to interact with the magnetic poles in the stator. Motors of this type can run on either AC or DC current, hence the term "universal". Since the household power commonly in use at that time could be anything from low voltage to high voltage DC (the Edison system) or variations of AC voltages, universal motors were found to be the most compliant with these early electrical systems. Maybe as a consequence of the several voltages available back then, most of the early universal phono motors were designed to operate on a fairly low voltage of around 24 to 60 volts or so. So in order to use them with 120 volts power that is universal throughout the USA today, you need to add a "ballast" resistor in series with the motor to reduce its operating voltage to whatever it was designed for. Some of these motors have an identification plate attached to them that states their operating voltage range. But some don't. So unless you have some other service data that tells you what the motor voltage should be, you have to figger that out by trial and error. The easiest way to do this is to hook up the motor to a variable voltage device such as a variable autotransformer, typically referred to as a "variac" or a "powerstat". These devices have a continually variable output voltage, usually determined by a knob that slides a contact brush around the periphery of a toroidal winding on a magnetic core. Then slowly raise the voltage on the variac up from 0 and observe the operation of the motor. Motors such as these had their speeds dependent on their applied voltage. In order to make them suitable for phonograph use where you want a constant speed, the motor assembly usually had a mechanical flyball governor attached to it which operated in a manner similar to the flyball governors that were used on spring motors. The electric motor functions as a torque motor and its speed is controlled by the mechanical braking action of the governor. So you would need to have the governor mechanism attached and functioning while you try to determine the motor voltage. Crank up the variac until the governor engages the brake mechanism to provide the desired platter speed of 78 or 80 rpm. If you have the motor mounted in the player, play a record which will produce some additional drag on the motor and raise the variac voltage until the playing record is running at the desired speed at the outermost diameter (greatest drag). Then notch the variac voltage up a little more, say 5% to 10% or so to provide some reserve torque for "draggy" records. Note the voltage you are providing to the motor. Then you can either leave the variac in place permanently, or you can figger out how to reduce the 120 volt household voltage to what the motor wants to see. You can do this by inserting a big, power-hungry wirewound resistor in series with the motor, which needs to dissipate a lot of power and will get VERY HOT in operation, which is why they are typically wound on a ceramic core. This is what most of the player manufacturers did in their original designs. This allows the motor to continue to be used with either DC (maybe if you're still living in the downtown New York City subway system) or typical AC. If you only plan to use the motor with AC, you can look for a fixed transformer that provides the required voltage change that you need. You'll need to use a fairly hefty transformer for this application since the motor is probably consuming 25 watts or so and the transformer will have to provide sufficient current for the job. In summary, your Columbia motor is probably a low voltage universal type. So you DO NOT want to hook it up directly to your 120 volt household current. Doing so will burn it up pretty quickly. Perform the variable voltage check described above to determine the proper motor voltage and then find a way to step down your household 120 volt outlet power to what the motor wants. Greg Bogantz On 11/6/2019 5:11 PM, Ron L'Herault via Phono-L wrote: You should be able to figure out what connects to what with visual inspection and a meter that measures continuity.
Re: [Phono-L] Looking for a 1941 RCA crystal phonograph cartridge
Gee, I'm the owner of the Electrola group, but it's been so long since I joined it that I can't remember exactly how to do it :o) Also, they've changed it several times since I joined. Anyway, it's a "listserve" just like this phono-l listserve which means that you can access it via the website and also you can sign up to both send and receive messages from the group via email. Here's the website of the Yahoo Groups assortment: https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/dir From this page, enter "Electrola" in the "search groups" box at the top of the page. This will take you to the Electrola home page. There you can click on the purple button titled "join group" near the middle of the page. There you can input your name and email data and choose how you want your messages delivered. I think you can also still join the group by sending an email to the following address with the word "subscribe" in the title line of your email: electrola-subscr...@yahoogroups.com Welcome aboard! Greg Bogantz On 4/24/2018 7:45 PM, Richard Rubin via Phono-L wrote: Thanks, Greg. How does one subscribe to the group? *From:* Phono-L <phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org> on behalf of Greg Bogantz via Phono-L <phono-l@oldcrank.org> *Sent:* Monday, April 23, 2018 12:53 AM *To:* Richard Rubin via Phono-L *Cc:* Greg Bogantz *Subject:* Re: [Phono-L] Looking for a 1941 RCA crystal phonograph cartridge You might also want to post this request to the Electrola group on Yahoo that specializes in the early electronic phonos of all makes. We pretty much discuss everything up thru the 1950s and later. email to: electr...@yahoogroups.com <mailto:electr...@yahoogroups.com> Greg Bogantz On 4/22/2018 6:24 PM, Richard Rubin via Phono-L wrote: Greetings. I'm looking for a complete RCA crystal cartridge from 1941 -- if it is stamped with the part number 38598, 39919 or 38453, and looks like the ones in the photos, I'm interested. This cartridge would have been used in several radio-phonograph consoles, including the RCA V-210, RCA V-215 and RCA V-225. If you have one or know of someone who might, please let me know. (Don't worry if the crystal is dead -- I expect it to be.) Thanks! ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org Unsubscribe:phono-l-unsubscr...@oldcrank.org <mailto:phono-l-unsubscr...@oldcrank.org> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient_term=icon> Virus-free. www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient_term=link> ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org Unsubscribe: phono-l-unsubscr...@oldcrank.org --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org Unsubscribe: phono-l-unsubscr...@oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] Looking for a 1941 RCA crystal phonograph cartridge
You might also want to post this request to the Electrola group on Yahoo that specializes in the early electronic phonos of all makes. We pretty much discuss everything up thru the 1950s and later. email to: electr...@yahoogroups.com Greg Bogantz On 4/22/2018 6:24 PM, Richard Rubin via Phono-L wrote: Greetings. I'm looking for a complete RCA crystal cartridge from 1941 -- if it is stamped with the part number 38598, 39919 or 38453, and looks like the ones in the photos, I'm interested. This cartridge would have been used in several radio-phonograph consoles, including the RCA V-210, RCA V-215 and RCA V-225. If you have one or know of someone who might, please let me know. (Don't worry if the crystal is dead -- I expect it to be.) Thanks! ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org Unsubscribe: phono-l-unsubscr...@oldcrank.org --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org Unsubscribe: phono-l-unsubscr...@oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] C-4 DD stylus
I don't think that playing DDs is what this stylus was intended to do. To be effective for playing vertical cut discs with a lateral pickup, the stylus assembly has to have the tip considerably offset to the side relative to the line of the shank. This allows the assembly to be a lever that translates vertical motion to lateral motion. This stylus looks like an early jeweled tip intended for lateral pickups or reproducers. Greg Bogantz On 2/16/2018 3:20 PM, Ron L'Herault via Phono-L wrote: Could the stylus in the attached image be for an Edison C-4 to allow it to play Diamond Discs? Ron L ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org Unsubscribe: phono-l-unsubscr...@oldcrank.org --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org Unsubscribe: phono-l-unsubscr...@oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] Last Edison factory gets a reprieve
Here's an interesting article about how the last of the original unrestored Edison factory buildings in West Orange, NJ is avoiding being demolished and is being given a new lease on life: http://go.sparkpostmail.com/f/a/_hPUlARvdIHulXDrYi0U6w~~/AABF2wA~/RgRZ3qp2P0EIAGv96kh9bB9XA3NwY1gEAFkGc2hhcmVkYQhzdGFuZGFyZGANNTIuMzguMTkxLjIzN0IKAAH2dv1Xn3pShVIYYXJjaGl2ZUBtYWlsLWFyY2hpdmUuY29tCVEEAERZaHR0cDovL3d3dy5jbm4uY29tLzIwMTYvMTAvMTEvdHJhdmVsL3Rob21hcy1lZGlzb24tYmF0dGVyeS1mYWN0b3J5LWRldmVsb3BtZW50L2luZGV4Lmh0bWxHAnt9 It's amusing that one of the reasons for the reprieve is that the Edison cement of which it is constructed has steadfastly resisted several attempts by wrecking balls to bring it down. The Old Man's obstinacy lives on. Greg Bogantz --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://go.sparkpostmail.com/f/a/AvZnqTZUbVSwug8oe8qWGw~~/AABF2wA~/RgRZ3qp2P0EIAGv96kh9bB9XA3NwY1gEAFkGc2hhcmVkYQhzdGFuZGFyZGANNTIuMzguMTkxLjIzN0IKAAH2dv1Xn3pShVIYYXJjaGl2ZUBtYWlsLWFyY2hpdmUuY29tCVEEAEQfaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYXZhc3QuY29tL2FudGl2aXJ1c0cCe30~ ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org Unsubscribe: phono-l-unsubscr...@oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] Orthophonic vs. Electric?
produce significant mistracking (blasting), the sounds of good reproducers are pretty similar. Contrary to how some listeners yammer on about one tiny detail over another insignificant one, it's not rocket science. The main variables in designing an acoustic reproducer (which are significantly different from those required for a modern phono pickup) are determining where the system resonance is placed and keeping the moving mass low enough while still providing sufficient compliance at the needle tip to produce minimum mistracking. Higher resonant frequencies due to stiffer diaphragms shift the response peak higher and produce a squawkier sound. The trick is to find a pleasant frequency at which to place the resonance and then damp it properly without killing the efficiency (loudness) of the reproducer. Slight variations in the resonant frequencies is the main audible difference among reproducers. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Andrew Baron a...@popyrus.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Cc: Big Sky Learning bigskylearn...@gmail.com Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2014 10:12 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Orthophonic vs. Electric? Hi Ron and all ~ Using a Kent adapter or similar device, yes, much easier, and the reverse of my supposition. It seems to me that a test done in both directions would be more informative than one or the other in isolation. Steve Medved just brought this fascinating YouTube video to my attention, to be shared as part of this discussion, attributed to Carsten Fischer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zQw4K80QtM It's an interesting video and certainly the methods represent out-of-the-box, if not pseudo-scientific thinking: The Edison side of a salvaged Brunswick Ultona reproducer housing (with the full needle bar, similar to the Edison needle bar, etc.), other side (lateral side) eliminated and blocked off (ostensibly sealed against air leaks), and a short connecting tube to mate it to Victor 10-50 (!), to take advantage of the folded exponential horn. The modified Brunswick housing is equipped with a Victor Orthophonic Duralumin diaphragm (in hill-and-dale mode), and the presenter adds silent editorial comments as superimposed text, allowing the sound he recorded with a small condenser mic to let us hear the result. Very hard, even with larger speakers to get a sense of the real value of the experiment, which expect is due to the limitations of his recording method. Other limiting factors, or at least factors that make this somewhat less than an apples to apples test, is that the Brunswick system, or in this case the Brunswick parts adapted to the Victor arm) doesn't quite replicate the Edison Diamond Disc machine's tracking compliance in at least two ways: (a) I suspect that the compliance of the stylus to the groove would be adversely affected by the tracking force necessarily including the mass of the modified apparatus plus a portion of the Victor's tone arm (rather than as in the Edison system of it being limited to the tracking weight distributed more uniformly around the stylus), and (b) the necessity in this setup of the groove having to propel the entire equipment across as the record plays rather than the floating arrangement of the automatic tracking Edison DD system. I think these factors might combine to make for a more rigid, and quite possibly less responsive arrangement of groove, stylus and transferred acoustic energy to the horn. I think it's a fascinating choice to use the paper-thin Victor Duralumin diaphragm. The presenter tells us that mica will also work, but one can imagine it would narrow the dynamic range. However the mounting of the diaphragm as can be seen might possibly be hampered by an oversized retaining insulator, which also looks rather thick and one or both of these could impede the response. Another aspect that was bothering me a little was that the turntable dips and rises as it spins around (bent platter, as the spindle remains relatively true). This would have the effect of alternately adding and subtracting from whatever norm in the diaphragm's loading that the presenter was able to achieve with this modified arrangement of parts. The up and down, added to the more rigid load of also having to move the entire mass of reproducer and tone arm (add another intermediate joint in the Victor arm to the equation for the vertical accommodation of the uneven platter, and whatever differences in compliance and greater side-wall groove contact might be present, and for me it starts to be an interesting but not very accurate measure of how an Edison record, played as engineered, would sound through one of the large Orthophonic horns. I also have to wonder about the plumbing between the tone arm and the horn, and if this might also be a factor? Steve, Greg, others, are there other things I may be missing here? In the short term this video
Re: [Phono-L] Orthophonic vs. Electric?
Here's the short history of the fidelity of recorded sound: The earliest acoustic recording technology was VERY midrangey with no bass and no treble being recorded into the grooves. Likewise, the earliest acoustic players were also VERY midrangey and incapable of reproducing bass or treble. When you listen to an early acoustic record on an early acoustic player, they don't really complement each other so much as they do the same damage to the sound. They sound like a loud telephone. That is, you get a VERY, VERY or double-midrangey sound. The orthophonic era brought with it much more extended and flatter frequency response in both bass and treble, both in the recording equipment and in the acoustic playback. The net effect of playing an early electric recording on an acoustic orthophonic player is one of flatter, more extended frequency response. In short, a BIG improvement over the pre-ortho days. If you play an acoustic record on an ortho player, it sounds less midrangey and blatty than when played on an early player. Some people don't like this sound and consider it not authentic, but it is actually flatter response than the complementary noise you get from a pre-ortho player. Likewise, if you play an electric recording on an old acoustic player, you get a more blatty midrangey sound than if you play it on a more modern player. The earliest electronic players were actually worse sounding than the contemporary ortho acoustic players. The Victor 9-40, for example, which has both ortho acoustic as well as early electronic playback sounds better in the ortho acoustic mode than it does in the all-electronic mode. The reason is that the earliest electronics and speakers were pretty primitive. The early Victor electric players were odd designs in that they used an electric reproducer-driver that was amplified by the orthophonic horn. This would have worked out better if the driver design was better, but the net effect did not produce as good a fidelity as the contemporary all-acoustic players. They will play loudly, but their frequency response is pretty poor. The electronic players from most manufacturers were generally not very good until about 1929. The Victor RE-45 of 1929 was a revelation to listeners back then. It is vastly improved over the earlier designs, and it compares very favorably with much more modern players. If you are a collector of 1920s vintage radios, made it a point to listen to a Victor RE-45 or RE-75 radio/phono combination. The same radio and speaker was also used the in the radio-only models R-32 and R-52. There was no finer sounding radio set or radio/phono made in 1929. Electric recording playback on one of these sets is genuinely satisfying. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Richard richard_ru...@hotmail.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2014 7:03 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Orthophonic vs. Electric? I've never owned an orthophonic machine, but have recently been offered the chance to buy one (see other post), and I'm wondering if I should. My main concern has been one of sound quality; I've always suspected that acoustic records sound better on older, acoustic machines, and orthophonic/electric records sound best on electric machines. But this opportunity has me wondering: How do orthophonic/electric records sound when played on an orthophonic machine sound compared to when they're played on an electric machine (say, from the late 1920's or early 1930's)? All opinions are welcome, but what I'm really looking for is a comparison -- not just better or worse, but how they're different. And how do older acoustic records sound on an orthophonic machine? (In my humble opinion, they don't sound all that great on an electrical machine.) Finally, if I were to add one orthophonic machine to my collection someday, which one would you recommend if my top consideration is sound q uality? ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] newly-pressed 78 in latest Woody Guthrie box set.
Most of the newly-cut 78s are cut with a conventional LP recording stylus with a sharp V-tip and are intended to be played with a microgroove stylus. If you don't hear from the seller otherwise, I would assume that this record would be like this. If you are using a modern phono cartridge capable of tracking at 5 grams or less, there isn't much to worry about if you use the wrong stylus. Depending on the groove width the sound could vary. A wide groove (typical older 78s had groove widths of around 5 to 6 mils) with a sharp V at the bottom will play properly with either a typical 0.7 mil (or an elliptical) stereo stylus or with a 3.0 mil stylus. A typical LP sized groove (less than 3 mils wide) will play properly with an LP stylus. Using a 3 mil stylus on a narrow groove probably will play OK but you might hear some distortion or even groove skipping on loud passages. If this is the case, you should use the LP stylus. If the bottom of the groove is rounded rather than having a sharp V shape, the record is intended to be played with a bigger 78 stylus. Using a small LP stylus on such a record will result in distortion. As I said, I would doubt that any new 78s are cut with such a groove shape. But you shouldn't be inflicting any damage on the record with either an LP or a 78 stylus so long as the tracking force is low. So use the type of stylus that sounds the best. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Matthew Bullis matthewbul...@runbox.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 7:44 PM Subject: [Phono-L] newly-pressed 78 in latest Woody Guthrie box set. Based on the info in this article, there's a 78 made for this box set of Woody Guthrie material. I have an e-mail into the Woody Guthrie organization, asking them if the disc is to be played with a needle made for 78s, or one made for 33s, since it could be either case. I don't want to use the wrong stylus. The disc includes a song from the box set, and a 1961 Dylan recording of one of the VD songs Wooddy sang. The press release from Rounder is here: http://www.rounder.com/2013/08/news/definitive-woody-guthrie-collection-american-radical-patriot-coming-from-rounder-records-on-october-22 I eagerly await my set, being shipped to me, but I'll not use the 78 disc until I know for sure. Matthew ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Columbia Viva-Tonal 810 Photo Needed
I have a Columbia 810 with the completely original, untouched finish. There is a fair amount of color paint (mostly green) on the front (and sides) of the machine, in addition to some shading of the (probably) toned lacquer finish. I have seen several of these machines and there seems to be a little variation from one to another in their decoration and coloration. I would imagine that they were hand painted at the factory and they were not all identical. Here is a link to a discussion about the 800 and 810 models on the Talking Machine Forum. Included here are pictures of my 810 http://forum.talkingmachine.info/viewtopic.php?f=2t=12865start=10 Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Jim Cartwright jim...@earthlink.net To: 'Antique Phonograph List' phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2013 3:09 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Columbia Viva-Tonal 810 Photo Needed In collecting antique phonographs, I like to obtain twins, that is similar but not identical models.Some years ago I obtained a Viva-Tonal 800 which not too long ago was sonically restored using information suggestions provided by Anthony Sinclair carried out by local antique phonograph repairman, Jeff Cecil now gives excellent performance. So I was please to pick up its twin, the Viva-Tonal 810 at an antique mall yesterday.However, the 810 has been stripped is bereft of its original different color wood staining of different sections of the front doors, floral design above the doors, etc. I want to have its original appearance restored.The Viva-Tonal 810 came with a 1927 ad that gives some idea of how it originally looked as does the black-and-white illustration in Baumbach's The Columbia Phonograph Companion - Volume II.However, what is needed to facilitate restoration of the decorative details is a clear color image of the Vival-Tonal 810.Can anyone provide such? Many thanks for any help any of you may provide! Jim Cartwright IMMORTAL PERFORMANCES, INC Austin's Eclectic Used Record Store Since 1971 1404 West 30th StreetAustin, Texas 78703-1402 USA (512) 478-9954E-mail: jim...@earthlink.net -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 3917 bytes Desc: not available URL: http://oldcrank.org/pipermail/phono-l/attachments/20130922/c4a120e3/attachment.jpe -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 2023 bytes Desc: not available URL: http://oldcrank.org/pipermail/phono-l/attachments/20130922/c4a120e3/attachment-0001.jpe ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Vitaphone acoustic machine
Hi Ron, I have a Vitaphone model 60 which is the consolette version of this machine. Yes, I'd say it is anemic compared with most other machines of this vintage. The reason is pretty obvious - the design of the acoustic system is pretty silly. What appears to be the tonearm is more easily understood as being actually a HUGE stylus bar. The long wooden piece has the needle attached at the front end and it is expected to transmit the needle vibrations along the length of this wooden bar to a string at the back end which is coupled under tension to the center of the reproducer diaphragm which is located at the back of the tonearm. The actual tonearm is a metal structure positioned under the wooden bar that has a vertical and lateral pivot near the front that supports the wooden needle bar and allows both vertical and lateral wiggling of the wooden bar. As you can suspect, the compliance of this arrangement is ridiculously poor with a HUGE amount of mass (the whole wooden bar) having to be moved by the needle. The string that couples the back of the wooden bar to the diaphragm can be strung over a metal hook at the back of the lateral tonearm pivot stanchion which causes the tension in the string to be directed kinda sorta laterally to the diaphragm. This is the way the system is supposed to be set to play lateral records. The more direct linkage of the string drawing down vertically from the diaphragm (not threaded over the metal hook) is the setup for playing vertical records. As you might expect, the vertical setup is more efficient and sensitive than the lateral setup. Consequently, I most often use my Vitaphone to play Pathe Sapphire discs with a sapphire ball stylus in the needle chuck. It sounds better playing Pathes than any lateral records. Theoretically, you could play Edison DDs by mounting an Edison diamond point in the needle chuck. But the tonearm friction is high enough that I haven't wanted to try playing DDs on the machine. In any case, the sound transmission thru the bizarre needle bar system is pretty inefficient and lossy which makes the Vitaphone have little volume compared with more conventional players, either Edisons, Pathes, or Victors. And the high moving mass of the wooden bar causes considerable loss of treble response, so the sound is pretty mellow compared with other machines. It's actually fairly pleasant and less honky than other acoustic players. The other weirdness of the model 60 is the complicated plumbing that connects the diaphragm output to the horn which is inside the LID of the player! So there are swivel joints that allow the horn to be tilted upward with the lid as it is raised, while still enabling the acoustic plumbing to remain intact and functional. So it will play through the horn with the lid either open or closed. Definitely different. Still, it's a neat looking piece that is seldom seen and it does work after a fashion. I have pictures of my model 60 if you would like to see them. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Ron L'Herault lhera...@verizon.net To: phonol...@yahoogroups.com; 'Antique Phonograph List' phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 1:44 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Vitaphone acoustic machine A few MOCAPS members have been discussing the lateral/vertical Vitaphone phono from the teens, early 20s. Only one member heard one 20 or more years ago and that one may have been unrestored. He found it anemic sounding. S, I was wondering if any listmate(s) have a restored Vitaphone (it has a wooden tone arm and connects to the diaphragm via a string AFAIK). How does it sound compared to the Name brand machines of the same era? Thanks, Ron L ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Vitaphone acoustic machine
This topic of the Vitaphone had come up last year on the TMF forum. I posted some pictures there then that showed the way the thread connected the wooden needle bar to the reproducer diaphragm. I've added a few more pictures there that show more of the model 60 machine. Here's the link to that page for those who want to see the pictures: http://forum.talkingmachine.info/viewtopic.php?f=7t=11354 Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Ron L'Herault lhera...@bu.edu To: 'Antique Phonograph List' phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 8:42 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Vitaphone acoustic machine Thanks for the detailed reply, Greg. I have seen pictures of this style already. Amazing. Ron -Original Message- From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] On Behalf Of Greg Bogantz Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 3:59 PM To: Antique Phonograph List Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Vitaphone acoustic machine Hi Ron, I have a Vitaphone model 60 which is the consolette version of this machine. Yes, I'd say it is anemic compared with most other machines of this vintage. The reason is pretty obvious - the design of the acoustic system is pretty silly. What appears to be the tonearm is more easily understood as being actually a HUGE stylus bar. The long wooden piece has the needle attached at the front end and it is expected to transmit the needle vibrations along the length of this wooden bar to a string at the back end which is coupled under tension to the center of the reproducer diaphragm which is located at the back of the tonearm. The actual tonearm is a metal structure positioned under the wooden bar that has a vertical and lateral pivot near the front that supports the wooden needle bar and allows both vertical and lateral wiggling of the wooden bar. As you can suspect, the compliance of this arrangement is ridiculously poor with a HUGE amount of mass (the whole wooden bar) having to be moved by the needle. The string that couples the back of the wooden bar to the diaphragm can be strung over a metal hook at the back of the lateral tonearm pivot stanchion which causes the tension in the string to be directed kinda sorta laterally to the diaphragm. This is the way the system is supposed to be set to play lateral records. The more direct linkage of the string drawing down vertically from the diaphragm (not threaded over the metal hook) is the setup for playing vertical records. As you might expect, the vertical setup is more efficient and sensitive than the lateral setup. Consequently, I most often use my Vitaphone to play Pathe Sapphire discs with a sapphire ball stylus in the needle chuck. It sounds better playing Pathes than any lateral records. Theoretically, you could play Edison DDs by mounting an Edison diamond point in the needle chuck. But the tonearm friction is high enough that I haven't wanted to try playing DDs on the machine. In any case, the sound transmission thru the bizarre needle bar system is pretty inefficient and lossy which makes the Vitaphone have little volume compared with more conventional players, either Edisons, Pathes, or Victors. And the high moving mass of the wooden bar causes considerable loss of treble response, so the sound is pretty mellow compared with other machines. It's actually fairly pleasant and less honky than other acoustic players. The other weirdness of the model 60 is the complicated plumbing that connects the diaphragm output to the horn which is inside the LID of the player! So there are swivel joints that allow the horn to be tilted upward with the lid as it is raised, while still enabling the acoustic plumbing to remain intact and functional. So it will play through the horn with the lid either open or closed. Definitely different. Still, it's a neat looking piece that is seldom seen and it does work after a fashion. I have pictures of my model 60 if you would like to see them. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Ron L'Herault lhera...@verizon.net To: phonol...@yahoogroups.com; 'Antique Phonograph List' phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 1:44 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Vitaphone acoustic machine A few MOCAPS members have been discussing the lateral/vertical Vitaphone phono from the teens, early 20s. Only one member heard one 20 or more years ago and that one may have been unrestored. He found it anemic sounding. S, I was wondering if any listmate(s) have a restored Vitaphone (it has a wooden tone arm and connects to the diaphragm via a string AFAIK). How does it sound compared to the Name brand machines of the same era? Thanks, Ron L ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono
Re: [Phono-L] Vitaphone acoustic machine
Vitaphone evidently had a change in the design of their tonearms along the way. The big flattened C-shaped weight that some of them have at the end of the tonearm (as seen on the open horn machine on the TFM page) was replaced by a large flat weight positioned below the wooden bar in my machine which gives it a more streamlined look. I expect that the tracking force is about the same with either design. I don't know about my machine being Canadian. There is no indication of that. The model tag states that it was made in Plainfield, New Jersey and that it is a Type 60. I suspect that the model 60 was merely the newer model of the 50, perhaps incorporating the change in the tonearm weight, perhaps among other minor changes. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: DanKj ediso...@verizon.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 10:47 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Vitaphone acoustic machine Your 60 is almost identical to my 50; was 60 the Canadian version? I also see that yours lacks the big weight that mine has, on the business end of the 'tone arm' ; I wonder if that would explain why mine is loud yours is anemic ... - Original Message - From: Greg Bogantz gbogan...@charter.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 9:51 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Vitaphone acoustic machine This topic of the Vitaphone had come up last year on the TMF forum. I posted some pictures there then that showed the way the thread connected the wooden needle bar to the reproducer diaphragm. I've added a few more pictures there that show more of the model 60 machine. Here's the link to that page for those who want to see the pictures: http://forum.talkingmachine.info/viewtopic.php?f=7t=11354 Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Ron L'Herault lhera...@bu.edu To: 'Antique Phonograph List' phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 8:42 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Vitaphone acoustic machine Thanks for the detailed reply, Greg. I have seen pictures of this style already. Amazing. Ron -Original Message- From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] On Behalf Of Greg Bogantz Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 3:59 PM To: Antique Phonograph List Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Vitaphone acoustic machine Hi Ron, I have a Vitaphone model 60 which is the consolette version of this machine. Yes, I'd say it is anemic compared with most other machines of this vintage. The reason is pretty obvious - the design of the acoustic system is pretty silly. What appears to be the tonearm is more easily understood as being actually a HUGE stylus bar. The long wooden piece has the needle attached at the front end and it is expected to transmit the needle vibrations along the length of this wooden bar to a string at the back end which is coupled under tension to the center of the reproducer diaphragm which is located at the back of the tonearm. The actual tonearm is a metal structure positioned under the wooden bar that has a vertical and lateral pivot near the front that supports the wooden needle bar and allows both vertical and lateral wiggling of the wooden bar. As you can suspect, the compliance of this arrangement is ridiculously poor with a HUGE amount of mass (the whole wooden bar) having to be moved by the needle. The string that couples the back of the wooden bar to the diaphragm can be strung over a metal hook at the back of the lateral tonearm pivot stanchion which causes the tension in the string to be directed kinda sorta laterally to the diaphragm. This is the way the system is supposed to be set to play lateral records. The more direct linkage of the string drawing down vertically from the diaphragm (not threaded over the metal hook) is the setup for playing vertical records. As you might expect, the vertical setup is more efficient and sensitive than the lateral setup. Consequently, I most often use my Vitaphone to play Pathe Sapphire discs with a sapphire ball stylus in the needle chuck. It sounds better playing Pathes than any lateral records. Theoretically, you could play Edison DDs by mounting an Edison diamond point in the needle chuck. But the tonearm friction is high enough that I haven't wanted to try playing DDs on the machine. In any case, the sound transmission thru the bizarre needle bar system is pretty inefficient and lossy which makes the Vitaphone have little volume compared with more conventional players, either Edisons, Pathes, or Victors. And the high moving mass of the wooden bar causes considerable loss of treble response, so the sound is pretty mellow compared with other machines. It's actually fairly pleasant and less honky than other acoustic players. The other weirdness of the model 60 is the complicated plumbing that connects the diaphragm output
[Phono-L] Capitol Records film
This came up as kind of an aside on another phono thread today, but I think it deserves its own thread. I had not seen this film before and it's kinda interesting. It was just posted on YouTube in June, so it's probably pretty new to the blogosphere. It has Mel Blanc leading a record customer played by Billy May thru the process of making a Capitol record. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxkSRvkKF9k It was apparently put together as an internal company biz promotion sometime around 1951. See the poster's comments about this film on the YouTube page. The first part of it has Mel doing some schtick with May and sounding like Bugs Bunny which is kinda cornball, but the rest of the film is pretty informative. Some inside jokes to be seen, including a swipe at Victor early in the film where Mel takes May's hat and plops it on Nipper's head in a record shop (actually owned by one of Capitol's founders Glenn Wallichs) next to a poster offering Dog records for 4 cents each. Ha. Jay Livingston, president of Capitol at the time has a cameo, as do several other Capitol artists and celebrities including Les Paul and Mary Ford. Color film quality is good - this must have been a little-played long-lost copy stored in a vault for years. There is no mention of the Hollywood Capitol record plant, so I guess it hadn't been built yet when this film was made. But it came online within just a few years because I remember seeing it listed on the back of Capitol LP jackets in the late 1950s. The Capitol Tower was built in 1956, so the studios that are visited in the film are in a different building. The record plant tour is kinda mixed up as they show both shellac production of 78s and vinyl 45s all smooshed together in the dialog. They also show 45s with the 1.5 inch centers partially dinked out as was commonly done in Europe, but I don't remember this being done for US product. Record album book production for 78s and box production for the early 45rpm album boxes is also shown which I have not seen depicted on film before. It's interesting to me that there is no mention of wax masters, so evidently lacquers had fully replaced wax by 1951. Capitol was evidently doing copper laminated with nickel metal parts at the time. I know that RCA was using copper during the 78rpm years, but we migrated over to fully using nickel by the time I got there in 1973. I don't know if this copper/nickel laminate process was industry standard in the 1950s or not. Seems kinda wasteful to me as it makes it difficult to separate and recycle the metals after production. But this is an informative film covering record production in a period in the early 1950s that seems to be scarcely documented from what I've seen. Greg Bogantz ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Any modern-produced 78s?
Yes, a few new releases are being made on 78rpm records. But these are pressed in vinyl, not shellac. So far as I know, nobody has pressed in shellac since the last ones were made in India in the 1960s. Furthermore, the groove width is typically narrow and properly V-shaped so that they are designed to be played with a typical microgroove stylus tip, not the 3 mil size that fits the early 78s. And some of the releases are in stereo, so the typical microgroove stereo cartridge and stylus is appropriate for their proper playback. You occasionally see the new 78s available on eBay. Googling the subject will return several hits. Here's an article about some newer 78 releases: http://www.78rpmcommunity.com/blogs/21/13/they-re-still-releasing-78-rpms Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Matthew Bullis matthewbul...@runbox.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2013 9:54 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Any modern-produced 78s? Hello from hot Phoenix. I'm wondering if there are any modern 78s that have been produced any time recently? The only one I ever heard of was the one produced in the 70s by R. Crumb, of novelty songs. I bought the three pieces that comprise a modern cartridge for my Stanton turntable, so that my existing 78s play as well as they can for my ability to transfer them digitally. This ability made me think of my question. I know that some analog manufacturers, especially of the Bluenote label, have been producing lps that are the size of 33s but actually play at 45 speed. Perhaps the reason they don't consider 78 speed is because you need to use a wider needle. I've never understood why the manufacturers of those USB turntables don't get a double stylus so that you don't wreck your 78s with a 33 needle, but that's a different subject. Anyhow, any thoughts about my original question? Matthew ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Capehart Model 1011 M
That model number doesn't ring a bell with me, but it could be one of the Panamuse models from Capehart. The letters in the Capehart model numbers indicate the model year. The M in this model number probably indicates that it was made in 1941 or 42. The famous Capeharts are in the 3-digit series, i.e. the 100, 200, 300, and 400 series (with the occasional 500 super-deluxe custom models), all of which had the flipover record changer. The Panamuse models were the bargain models and typically had a drop-type changer, probably a P-40 or P-60 series in these model years. The Panamuse models are not very popular with collectors, so the market price of one of these is likely to be not very impressive. The Panamuse models were continued after WWII as were the 3-digit series (all of which were in the N and P model numbers), but they continued to be the bargain series and still are not very collectible. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Burdette Walters burdettewalt...@yahoo.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2013 6:54 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Capehart Model 1011 M I have a friend that has a friend that said they had a Capehart tube type radio phonograph that works. She said it might have a few scratches, but other than that it is supposed to work fine. She thought it was bought in the 1940s. Does anyone have any info on this machine? Any idea what could be offered for it? I collect only wind up phonographs, and my friend says if it doesn't have a crank sticking out of it, he can't run it LOL (That is actually more true than not). Burdette Walters ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Brunswick panatropes (continued)
Although the pictures are pretty terrible, this eBay console is very like the one I mentioned earlier that I have pictures of. The record changer is a Farnsworth P-56 which is a totally unique design and cannot be mistaken for anything else. And the radio dial shows that it is AM and FM with the postwar FM channel numbers. It's all circa 1947. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: DanKj ediso...@verizon.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 12:39 AM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Brunswick panatropes (continued) I think there's one on eebay, right now: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Brunswick-radio-with-panatrope-model-t4000-/151052855927 - Original Message - From: rpm...@aol.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 11:41 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Brunswick panatropes (continued) Wikipedia supports a substantial article about Brunswick (named for its creator, an emigrant from Switzerland) and its subsequent association with Mr. Balke and Mr. Collender, all during the 19th century. It mentions their discs and phonographs. It eventually manufactured other non-billiard objects too, and the name still does exist and a company carrying the name Brunswick of course does exist today. There is no mention of its remaining in the record business or any objects associated with phonographs after its sale to Warner Brothers ca. 1930 --- although record collectors know that discs with Brunswick labels were manufactured well into the 1930s. In a message dated 6/4/2013 9:51:56 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, gbogan...@charter.net writes: I have some pictures of a Brunswick console that is from about 1947, definitely after WWII. It is labeled as Brunswick with Panatrope. It looks like it was actually made by Capehart-Farnsworth as it uses the Farnsworth P-56 record changer and the chassis looks like a Farnsworth AM-FM model from 1947. It even uses the FM channel numbers from 200 to 300 on the dial rather than the FM frequencies in MHz. Capehart-Farnsworth were among the few makers to use the FM channel numbers in the postwar period. So Brunswick evidently continued the use of the Panatrope moniker into the postwar period and probably continued to use it until they went out of the radio/phono business shortly thereafter. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: rpm...@aol.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Monday, June 03, 2013 2:44 AM Subject: [Phono-L] Brunswick panatropes I visited a friend yesterday and he showed me a Brunswick Panatrope (with phonograph changer and radio) which he believed dated to the late 1930s. My parents owned a model, c. 1930, with phonograph and radiola, and I had no idea that the Brunswick name was used on combination credenzas through that decade. Can someone tell me when the Brunswick name was dropped from such machines? Paul Charosh ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Brunswick panatropes
I have some pictures of a Brunswick console that is from about 1947, definitely after WWII. It is labeled as Brunswick with Panatrope. It looks like it was actually made by Capehart-Farnsworth as it uses the Farnsworth P-56 record changer and the chassis looks like a Farnsworth AM-FM model from 1947. It even uses the FM channel numbers from 200 to 300 on the dial rather than the FM frequencies in MHz. Capehart-Farnsworth were among the few makers to use the FM channel numbers in the postwar period. So Brunswick evidently continued the use of the Panatrope moniker into the postwar period and probably continued to use it until they went out of the radio/phono business shortly thereafter. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: rpm...@aol.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Monday, June 03, 2013 2:44 AM Subject: [Phono-L] Brunswick panatropes I visited a friend yesterday and he showed me a Brunswick Panatrope (with phonograph changer and radio) which he believed dated to the late 1930s. My parents owned a model, c. 1930, with phonograph and radiola, and I had no idea that the Brunswick name was used on combination credenzas through that decade. Can someone tell me when the Brunswick name was dropped from such machines? Paul Charosh ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] JICO Eagle Steel Needles?
Well, silly me, I should have known that Google is my friend. A little poking around the internet yields this English language site that describes the various JICO styli available directly from Japan: http://stylus.export-japan.com/ And the deluxe S.A.S. models are also available from LP Gear: http://www.lpgear.com/category/JICO.html Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Greg Bogantz gbogan...@charter.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 9:06 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] JICO Eagle Steel Needles? What interests me is that this company has a fairly complete line of what appear to be good quality replacement styli for modern stereo cartridges. Considering that Stanton and Shure do NOT make replacement styli for their premium models anymore, I wonder if anybody is importing these from JICO. I don't see any indication that there is an English-friendly website equivalent to the Japanese one, so I can't decipher much of the technical imformation. But the pictures and the smattering of English on the site indicates that they have Shibata or quadrahedral line-contact types available for the Audio Technica and Stanton lines, and the nearly impossible to find Micro-Ridge styli for the Shure models as indicated by the MR in their model numbers. Decoding the prices in yen for these models, they aren't cheap but the fact that they are available at all is a revelation. I'd sure like to find out more about these. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Arvin Casas it...@arvincasas.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 8:09 PM Subject: [Phono-L] JICO Eagle Steel Needles? Hi All, I happened to run across these needles and was curious to see if anybody had any experiences with them? These are modern antique phonograph needles made in Japan by a precision jewelry manufacturer called JICO. The company, aside from precision jewelry bits, apparently makes styli for the retro hi-fi / audiophile market. In keeping with the recent trend/interest in Japan in antique phonographs (some may have seen the hobby kits coming out of Japan allowing you to build your own Edison, or other mechanically powered model gramophones), JICO is making carbon steel acoustic phonograph needles called Eagle. http://jico.co.jp/product/ http://shop.jico.co.jp/accessories/ I can't read Japanese, but from what I can decipher via my Google translation plug-in, these Eagle carbon steel needles are designed for 8-10 plays. They even package them in 50's style Japanese tins (modern graphics, but old style, sliding cover tins). Has anybody had a chance to try these? I know very well we have contemporary US and European needle manufacturers, but this is the first I've seen of some coming out of Asia and not in a knock-off or counterfeit vein. These are being made via hi-end Japan, not the darkened alleys of China or India. If anything, a curious FYI. The quest for multiplay needles, the sequel. :-) Arvin ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] JICO Eagle Steel Needles?
What interests me is that this company has a fairly complete line of what appear to be good quality replacement styli for modern stereo cartridges. Considering that Stanton and Shure do NOT make replacement styli for their premium models anymore, I wonder if anybody is importing these from JICO. I don't see any indication that there is an English-friendly website equivalent to the Japanese one, so I can't decipher much of the technical imformation. But the pictures and the smattering of English on the site indicates that they have Shibata or quadrahedral line-contact types available for the Audio Technica and Stanton lines, and the nearly impossible to find Micro-Ridge styli for the Shure models as indicated by the MR in their model numbers. Decoding the prices in yen for these models, they aren't cheap but the fact that they are available at all is a revelation. I'd sure like to find out more about these. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Arvin Casas it...@arvincasas.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 8:09 PM Subject: [Phono-L] JICO Eagle Steel Needles? Hi All, I happened to run across these needles and was curious to see if anybody had any experiences with them? These are modern antique phonograph needles made in Japan by a precision jewelry manufacturer called JICO. The company, aside from precision jewelry bits, apparently makes styli for the retro hi-fi / audiophile market. In keeping with the recent trend/interest in Japan in antique phonographs (some may have seen the hobby kits coming out of Japan allowing you to build your own Edison, or other mechanically powered model gramophones), JICO is making carbon steel acoustic phonograph needles called Eagle. http://jico.co.jp/product/ http://shop.jico.co.jp/accessories/ I can't read Japanese, but from what I can decipher via my Google translation plug-in, these Eagle carbon steel needles are designed for 8-10 plays. They even package them in 50's style Japanese tins (modern graphics, but old style, sliding cover tins). Has anybody had a chance to try these? I know very well we have contemporary US and European needle manufacturers, but this is the first I've seen of some coming out of Asia and not in a knock-off or counterfeit vein. These are being made via hi-end Japan, not the darkened alleys of China or India. If anything, a curious FYI. The quest for multiplay needles, the sequel. :-) Arvin ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Turntable Motor Question
There were a number of direct drive phono motors made back in the 78rpm days. The General Industries Flyer models are among the most common. Other ones that I can think of were used in Webster-Chicago players and changers. These motors date from the 1930s, up to WWII. They are 90 degree worm gear drives direct to the platter spindle. They are robust and would easily drive a platter under the drag of an acoustic reproducer. Most of them were originally used with the old horseshoe magnetic pickups that tracked at the same force as acoustic reproducers. Another option would be to use an induction disc motor from the late 1920s such as used by Victor and Edison (motor made by GE). These are also direct drive and pretty readily available from phono boneyard parts dealers. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Vinyl Visions vinyl.visi...@live.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 11:23 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Turntable Motor Question I am at my wits end, trying to find someone who can rewind/fix a motor for my Fairy Phonograph Lamp. What I am considering as a temporary fix (not altering the original parts in any way) was to use a 78 rpm turntable motor from a jukebox. Does anyone know of a direct drive type motor that would handle the weight of a 12 steel turntable and the resulting drag from the acoustic reproducer and steel needle? I have been researching the original Fairy motor for over 8 months and cannot find anything about it regarding amps, hp and rpms - there is no tag on any of the three that I have looked at. I am restoring a second Fairy lamp that has the same motor problem as my first one - motor spins, but slows to a stop with any load. I have been told that the motor is a strange one since it is wound for three different types of power. Parts for these phonos are non-existent, thus the idea of using a strong jukebox turntable motor which is already running at 78 rpms. The original motor has a resistor to cut the power and uses a pulley - governor - worm screw to meshed gear transmission to run the turntable and the speed is controlled by a simple brake mechanism. Any ideas or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Curt ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Edison Bearing
It is important to note the difference between bronze bushings and sintered bronze bushings. The former require regular lubrication as does any other plain bearing. But the sintering process produces a material that is porous and will hold lubricant in its pores which significantly reduces the need for regular oiling. Here's a description of proper and improper machining of sintered bronze: http://www.lm-tarbell.com/machining_sintered_bronze.htm Such bushings have been used for electric motors for decades and are very dependable. To us old-timers, they were known as oilite bearings. Turns out, that is now the tradename of a company who furnishes such bearings: http://www.oilite.com/bearings.asp Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Randy Larson ra...@cityprayz.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 12:35 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Edison Bearing Ronald Thanks so much for your input, I really appreciate it. The only reason I used stainless steel is that it would last longer. The oil in the bearing would sustain it.Bronze is such a soft metal but did not know about it's absorbency. That may possibly reduce any wear on the metal. I will try the bronze. Thanks! Also, any suggestions on what oil has worked best for you? I am going to try some teflon based oil, but they are harder to come by where I live. I do have an order for some and hope it will be here in a couple of weeks. Thanks again Randy On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Ron L'Herault lhera...@bu.edu wrote: So why didn't you use something like sintered bronze for the bearing? It absorbs and holds oil. Ronald L'Herault Lab Supervisor, Biomaterials Division B.U. School of Dental Medicine 801 Albany Street S203 Roxbury, MA 02119 -Original Message- From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] On Behalf Of Randy Larson Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 11:48 AM To: Antique Phonograph List Subject: [Phono-L] Edison Bearing I want to thank everyone who expressed interest in the Edison bearing. I've received enough request that will keep me busy for several weeks. So I'm sorry I can't make the offer free anymore. One question is why make one in the first place? A collector once said to me years ago; one of the problems with an Edison motor is that there is steel on steel friction with only the oil you can externally place on it. That in itself initiated the wheels spinning. I wondered if I could improve it. This bearing provides a continuous feed of oil to the bearing and reduce the constant need to oil it externally. Maybe it's crazy and won't make a difference. But I'm sending it out to several individuals to test it and see if it is an improvement. Or maybe it's because I'm too lazy to oil the motor as required! In 1963, I received my fathers Brunswick he played as a child. I was thrilled with it and began my enthusiasm for collecting, He would take me all over the city as I scoured for any old unit. In 1964, he paid $60 for my first Edison Standard (of which he only made $75 a week). I was stunned that he would make such a sacrifice for me. What is interesting is that he worked for Alcoa Aluminum. He was an avid inventor and came up with several improvements for the machines he operated. He was even recognized for several awards (unfortunately nothing financially). He passed away in 2011 at the age of 91 He was my best friend, hero and my inspiration. And we both admired Edison! Maybe a long explanation of why, but there it is. Best Regards Randy Larson ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Edison and anti-semitism
The fact that Americans were more obsessed with immigrants and nationalities 100 years ago than we are today is well illustrated in the Edison BA record #4083 The Argentines, the Portuguese, and the Greeks by Ed Meeker. This is a fun song and one of my favorite BAs, but it also illustrates the popular preoccupation that people had with ethnic and national stereotypes back then. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Michael F. Khanchalian mfkhanchal...@altrionet.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 6:54 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Edison and anti-semitism You mean you look down on everyone except the Armenians. Come on now George :-) Sent from my iPhone On Jan 27, 2013, at 8:33 AM, George Glastris glast...@comcast.net wrote: Be that as it may, we Greeks look down on everyone else since we are the creators of Western Civilization. As the father in My Big Fat Greek Wedding said..Every thing comes from the Greek. Or as my late father would say to his best friends (Mr. Kelley, Mr. Germeroth, and Mr. Freed) When my people were writing the great philosophical books of the ancient world, your people were swinging from trees. Then again, he would remind my mother that HIS family were Corinthian but that HER family were only Thessalian. -Original Message- From: Vinyl Visions Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 10:12 AM To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Edison and anti-semitism Honestly, growing up in western Michigan, even as a white male I felt somewhat oppressed by the very nature of the clannish ethnic groups. It didn't matter if you were white, what mattered was whether you were Polish or Dutch. For example, the Dutch had bumper stickers that said If you're not Dutch, you're not much. Talk about discrimination... you couldn't buy a house in Zeeland, Michigan without going through an interview with a Dutch realtor - there were no For Sale/Rent signs in Zeeland, even though houses were obviously available. If your last name didn't end with a ski or other Polish ending you weren't accepted on the west side of Grand Rapids and the blacks were all located in their own section of town, because to avoid the busing and integration laws each small community that made up the total of Grand Rapids proper, incorporated into their own small towns. Benton Harbor, Michigan is a prime example: in the 1950's it was predominately white, but in the 60's a nd 70's as blacks moved in - whites moved out across the river to St Joseph... the last time I was there, Benton Harbor was referred to as Benton Harlem and St Joseph was almost totally white. From: rpm...@aol.com Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 23:44:50 -0500 To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: [Phono-L] Edison and anti-semitism Given when he was born, where he lived, and his own ethnic and cultural group, I would be surprised if he were either more or less anti-semitic than others in the United States who weren't themselves Jewish. It wasn't remarkable for a Christian home owner to want to sell his home to another Christian; for a Christian employer to want a Christian employee. What we have here, I think, is a kind of social distance felt by one social and cultural group from another. In my own lifetime, newspaper advertisements for houses for sale or apartments to rent in New York City included clues in their texts about who they wanted, e.g. --- churches nearby --- carrying with it an implication of who they *did not* want. Edison was a man of his time, place, and background. paul charosh ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] 1927/ Viva Tonal Columbia Felt Colors
I have the models 611, 613, and 810 which do not have the non-set (NS) auto stop feature, and I have never seen any of the VivaTonal models that included the NS feature. Checking the Baumbach book Columbia Phonograph Companion, Vol II I see that the NS feature seems to have begun with the new line of machines introduced in 1918 and continued thru the New Columbia series from 1924 to 1926. But it seems to have been dropped in the later VivaTonal and electric series of machines. The NS feature was somewhat complicated and may have proven difficult to maintain which may have been the reason that Columbia omitted it in their later models. They used an improved auto-stop feature in the electronic model 920 that was claimed to work on all types of records, but I have not seen one of these to tell if it is similar to the NS or otherwise how it works. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Arvin Casas aca...@spamcop.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 4:27 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] 1927/ Viva Tonal Columbia Felt Colors Based on what I see in mine (and its cruder ancestor in my Grafonola 75, 1915), the auto stop is a mechanism that works in conjunction with the motor via levers - a la the brake/stop/start underneath or above the motor board. It is completely outside the sound reproducing system. It should not have any connection to / intrusion upon anything from the horn all the way to the sound box, so it shouldn't contribute to leaks. Very odd. What model is yours Jim? (btw There's a nice 2-page ad on eBay right now that has photos of the 1927 models, mine is the lowest end and is only mentioned parenthetically, haha.) I agree that for Columbia to omit this in the higher end models (especially if they went to the effort of using velveteen) is surprising. Do you see anything under the platter that might suggest there might once have been an auto stop? On 1/9/13 1:13 AM, Jim Cartwright jim...@earthlink.net wrote: My large Viva-tonal (cabinet larger than Orthophonic Credenza, partially because doors slide into sides of cabinet)has green velveteen on the turntable. After the local repairman sealed the horn rebuilt the soundbox it sounds splendid even on late 1930s recordings such as Beecham conducting Mozart's Symphony in E-flat with the London Philharmonic. My only regret is that it lacks the marvelous non-set automatic stop that would cut off at the end of any record. A surprising lack in this next to top of the line model. Might this have been because it would introduce air leaks? -Original Message- From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] On Behalf Of Arvin Casas Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 9:03 PM To: Antique Phonograph List Subject: Re: [Phono-L] 1927/ Viva Tonal Columbia Felt Colors Thanks for the helpful info everyone! (Apologies for the late reply but I only subscribe to the digest.) I contacted the youtube poster of the videos that DanKj linked to and posted on the phonoland board where I'm also a member. Based on the responses from all three sources, it's Green-land for me! :) I found one tiny oil stained mini-bumper in the cabinet late last night, once green, so that confirms everyone's input. I ordered a Victor sized green felt replacement from Walt @ Gettysburg and will trim it down to size. I have leftovers from a botched turntable job on a Grafonola I restored a few months ago which I'll use for bumpers. Ron - Interesting about the velvet. Apparently they used felt early on, as in my case, but by the 700 800 series Columbia had models with velvet (I learned this via phonoland.) Does the velvet help make the records sound smoother? (Just kidding, though perhaps there's an audiophile who might ardently argue that.) Thanks again all. On 1/7/13 9:52 PM, Ron L'Herault lhera...@bu.edu wrote: My Vivatonals both have what looks like green velvet on the turntables. Bumpers look like green felt. Ron L On 1/8/13 2:51 AM, DanKj ediso...@verizon.net wrote: There's a 602 on YooToob, TT felt visible: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CL4n1HyTfq4 ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] 1927/ Viva Tonal Columbia Reproducers and Silvertonemachines
I have models 611, 613, and 810. They all have the same #15 reproducer. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Ron L'Herault lhera...@bu.edu To: 'Antique Phonograph List' phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 9:24 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] 1927/ Viva Tonal Columbia Reproducers and Silvertonemachines Both of mine have the aluminum diaphragm reproducer introduced in '26. I have not spotted a number designation on them. Ron L -Original Message- From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] On Behalf Of Steven Medved Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 4:51 PM To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: Re: [Phono-L] 1927/ Viva Tonal Columbia Reproducers and Silvertone machines Hello Columbia Viva Tonal owners, What reproducer is found on your machines? Is it the Columbia 15A type? Any Silvertone owners of orthophonic machines out there? Does anyone have the Silvertone machines sold by Sears in 1927 that look like Victors with different names including the Kenmore? For those who want so see what I am talking about I can send a huge file off list. This huge file was made by someone else who made copies from the original catalog. I believe Wayne made it, what a wonderful catalog for those who cannot remember 1927 Sears phonographs. Steve Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 16:27:25 -0500 From: aca...@spamcop.net To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: Re: [Phono-L] 1927/ Viva Tonal Columbia Felt Colors Based on what I see in mine (and its cruder ancestor in my Grafonola 75, 1915), the auto stop is a mechanism that works in conjunction with the motor via levers - a la the brake/stop/start underneath or above the motor board. It is completely outside the sound reproducing system. It should not have any connection to / intrusion upon anything from the horn all the way to the sound box, so it shouldn't contribute to leaks. Very odd. What model is yours Jim? (btw There's a nice 2-page ad on eBay right now that has photos of the 1927 models, mine is the lowest end and is only mentioned parenthetically, haha.) I agree that for Columbia to omit this in the higher end models (especially if they went to the effort of using velveteen) is surprising. Do you see anything under the platter that might suggest there might once have been an auto stop? On 1/9/13 1:13 AM, Jim Cartwright jim...@earthlink.net wrote: My large Viva-tonal (cabinet larger than Orthophonic Credenza, partially because doors slide into sides of cabinet)has green velveteen on the turntable. After the local repairman sealed the horn rebuilt the soundbox it sounds splendid even on late 1930s recordings such as Beecham conducting Mozart's Symphony in E-flat with the London Philharmonic. My only regret is that it lacks the marvelous non-set automatic stop that would cut off at the end of any record. A surprising lack in this next to top of the line model. Might this have been because it would introduce air leaks? -Original Message- From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] On Behalf Of Arvin Casas Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 9:03 PM To: Antique Phonograph List Subject: Re: [Phono-L] 1927/ Viva Tonal Columbia Felt Colors Thanks for the helpful info everyone! (Apologies for the late reply but I only subscribe to the digest.) I contacted the youtube poster of the videos that DanKj linked to and posted on the phonoland board where I'm also a member. Based on the responses from all three sources, it's Green-land for me! :) I found one tiny oil stained mini-bumper in the cabinet late last night, once green, so that confirms everyone's input. I ordered a Victor sized green felt replacement from Walt @ Gettysburg and will trim it down to size. I have leftovers from a botched turntable job on a Grafonola I restored a few months ago which I'll use for bumpers. Ron - Interesting about the velvet. Apparently they used felt early on, as in my case, but by the 700 800 series Columbia had models with velvet (I learned this via phonoland.) Does the velvet help make the records sound smoother? (Just kidding, though perhaps there's an audiophile who might ardently argue that.) Thanks again all. On 1/7/13 9:52 PM, Ron L'Herault lhera...@bu.edu wrote: My Vivatonals both have what looks like green velvet on the turntables. Bumpers look like green felt. Ron L On 1/8/13 2:51 AM, DanKj ediso...@verizon.net wrote: There's a 602 on YooToob, TT felt visible: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CL4n1HyTfq4 ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] 1927/ Viva Tonal Columbia Felt Colors
The non-set auto stop (NS) feature was unique to Columbia machines. As the name suggests, it did not require that the user set or adjust the stopping diameter which was required of other positional or proximity trip mechanisms. Earlier stop mechanisms required the user to set the needle in the last groove of the record and adjust the stop mechanism to trip at that diameter. Because early acoustic records had no lead-out groove or standardized lockout diameter (as became standard in post WWII records), automatic stop mechanisms could not be easily and universally implemented. The groove on early acoustic records simply ended (usually in a locked groove - Edison DDs did not use a locked groove) whenever the music was finished, regardless of what diameter on the record that was. Victor was the first to use the eccentric or reciprocating lockout groove which activated the stop when the tonearm was moved outward by the eccentric groove. Victor began using this feature in their late acoustic records. The Columbia NS stop feature was clever, but a bit complicated. It was the inverse of what became pretty standard in postwar record players that sensed the speed or velocity of the tonearm's rapid inward travel in the leadout groove of those records that had such a groove. Such modern mechanisms are known as the velocity trip type. The Columbia NS trip sensed the absence of velocity - that is, it sensed wen the tonearm stopped moving inward when the needle was in the final locked groove of the record. And it did not matter what that ending diameter was - the sensing was automatic and required no user intervention, hence, the non-set naming of this mechanism. This is a tricky thing to implement in purely mechanical means (try to imagine how you would do it) which is why the NS system was complicated. But these NS systems are unique and interesting to demonstrate when they work properly. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Arvin Casas aca...@spamcop.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 10:47 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] 1927/ Viva Tonal Columbia Felt Colors Interesting. Makes me wonder about the authenticity of my 602 as it does have the auto stop (unless I'm misunderstanding the NS feature Greg is talking about). I've yet to pop the motor board off, but so far everything looks Columbia (from needle cups, to hinge hardware to tonearm reproducer) How does one know if one has the non-set? (Newbie question, so please forgive me.*) As for the auto stop on my Grafonola 75 (or 85 - the storage system differentiating the models was missing, but I'm rebuilding one), that has never really worked as it stops two or three times per record when engaged via the motor plate switch. Perhaps mine isn't calibrated correctly or, as Greg mentions, it's just too difficult to maintain (for service as well as consumer). *I finally tracked down the Baumbach book (I had to order from Amazon UK, shipped from New York!) so hopefully after it flies all over the Atlantic, I'll have more info - if it's there at all! - and less newbie questions. :-) On 1/9/13 6:38 PM, Greg Bogantz gbogan...@charter.net wrote: I have the models 611, 613, and 810 which do not have the non-set (NS) auto stop feature, and I have never seen any of the VivaTonal models that included the NS feature. Checking the Baumbach book Columbia Phonograph Companion, Vol II I see that the NS feature seems to have begun with the new line of machines introduced in 1918 and continued thru the New Columbia series from 1924 to 1926. But it seems to have been dropped in the later VivaTonal and electric series of machines. The NS feature was somewhat complicated and may have proven difficult to maintain which may have been the reason that Columbia omitted it in their later models. They used an improved auto-stop feature in the electronic model 920 that was claimed to work on all types of records, but I have not seen one of these to tell if it is similar to the NS or otherwise how it works. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Arvin Casas aca...@spamcop.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 4:27 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] 1927/ Viva Tonal Columbia Felt Colors Based on what I see in mine (and its cruder ancestor in my Grafonola 75, 1915), the auto stop is a mechanism that works in conjunction with the motor via levers - a la the brake/stop/start underneath or above the motor board. It is completely outside the sound reproducing system. It should not have any connection to / intrusion upon anything from the horn all the way to the sound box, so it shouldn't contribute to leaks. Very odd. What model is yours Jim? (btw There's a nice 2-page ad on eBay right now that has photos of the 1927 models, mine is the lowest end and is only mentioned parenthetically, haha.) I agree that for Columbia
Re: [Phono-L] Cutting records
Shawn Borri can probably best answer your questions about cutting a cylinder. He makes the wax blanks that you would need to cut. But cutting a 78 is a whole different kettle of fish and pretty much a pipe dream if your purpose is to be able to play it on an acoustic phonograph. NO practical means exists for recording onto a disc that has sufficient durability that it can be played with an acoustic reproducer. In the 1930s there were disc recorders that cut into aluminum discs that could then be played back with the relatively crude crystal pickups of the day. But these recordings were noisy and really only suitable for speech documentation or amateur use. Vinyl records are still too soft to be played without significant wear on an acoustic reproducer. But in order to make a vinyl or shellac 78, you have to go thru ALL the motions of recording a master in a soft material such as wax or the modern medium of nitrocellulose lacquer. But these recordings are WAY too soft to be played by anything other than a very light tracking force modern pickup. To make a shellac record, these delicate masters have to be electroformed into at least a metal stamper (the typical process includes going thru a metal master and metal mother before making the stamper) which must then be put into a huge hydraulic press that compression molds the shellac material into the final record. You can pay to have vinyl records made this way, but nobody that I know of still molds shellac records. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: kt_06...@yahoo.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Friday, December 07, 2012 3:24 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Cutting records Any info on best way to cut a cylinder (or to cut a 78 disc) from a digital file (eg, .wma)? Any service or individual that does this sort of backwards transfer? I have one or two digital files of some music pieces (2 minutes each) that I'd like to have cut for playback onto cylinder and/or onto (78) disc. Or am I nuts? Thanks Kevin ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Brunswick model AZ-944 with a model number AP-952amplifier. information needed
Hi Bob, I have a copy of the RCA AP-952 schematic in my Rider's Perpetual Troubleshooter's Manual, volume 1. I can email it to you as an Adobe .PDF file if you need it. You can view it and print it from the free Adobe Reader software. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Bob Maffit maff...@bresnan.net To: 'Antique Phonograph List' phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 10:27 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Brunswick model AZ-944 with a model number AP-952amplifier. information needed Phono list: Some years back I had inquired about aBrunswick model AZ-944 phonograph, with a model number AP-952 amplifier. Someone had replied with a comment they had a schematic or documentation on the machine. I filed it away and ! can't find it now that I need it. *grin* If anyone has such, I would appreciate an E-mail / phone / address contact, so I could obtain such. I am getting around to considering restoring this with a phono companion. Sure would like anything on the machine etc. I trust this is not to far off topic as the phonograph was made around 1925 -1930? Thanks Bob ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Model L reproducer
Hi Steve, I have an original, untouched model L. The inside distance from the top of the weight to the peak of the limit loop is 11/32 inch. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Steven Medved steve_nor...@msn.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org; phonol...@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 9:08 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Model L reproducer Does anyone have a model L reproducer that they could give me a measurement of the space from the weight to the peak of the limit loop? I have an L weight someone turned into an N weight that I want to turn back into an L. Thanks, Steve ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Anyone know an early electric phono repair man?
Ron is correct that most idler wheel designs are such that the diameter of the wheel does not affect the speed at the platter. These wheels are common and used where the motor drives the outer diameter of the wheel and that same outer diameter drives the platter. The exception to the idler affecting the platter speed is when the idler has more than one outer diameter such as those wheels used the the early RCA 45rpm changers RP-168, RP-190, and some similar changers. These designs have two tires on them with different outer diameters. The motor drives one diameter while the other diameter drives the platter. On these type idlers it is critical to maintain the RATIO of the two diameters when resurfacing the rubber parts as it is this ratio that affects the platter speed. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Ron L'Herault lhera...@bu.edu To: 'Antique Phonograph List' phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Monday, September 03, 2012 3:03 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Anyone know an early electric phono repair man? I'm sure someone will come in definitively on this one, but I am almost positive, that a true idler wheel is not an influence on the speed of the turntable. The rotational speed of the turntable is determined by the ratio of the motor shaft to the turntable. It might be motor shaft diameter or circuference -or maybe it doesn't matter which you choose. I'm math challenged. The function of the idler is to provide traction to transmit the rotation of the motor to the turntable but not to change its speed. Proof of this would be a stepped motor shaft driving one idler such that changing the position to a different step changes the speed of the turntable. Ron L -Original Message- From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Baron Sent: Monday, September 03, 2012 1:03 PM To: Antique Phonograph List Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Anyone know an early electric phono repair man? I would add to Ron's comment about substitute rubber for the idler wheel, that an O-ring will indeed provide sufficient traction and makes an attractive alternative to get your platter running smoothly and quietly (provided that the turntable bearings / bushings are well cleaned and properly lubricated). As Ron noted, size (I think in this case diameter) is not critical, as long as it fits the steel idler disc snugly so it can't slip. However the thickness of the O-ring or other alternative tire should be as close to the same as it is on the original tire, or your turntable speed will be too fast or too slow. Andrew On Sep 2, 2012, at 8:54 PM, Ron L'Herault wrote: And if it has an idler wheel between the motor's rotating shaft and the turntable edge, its actual size is not critical. You can substitute a rubber O ring. However, a little internet searching will turn up places that will replace the idler's rubber with new to the same size as original. Ron L -Original Message- From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Baron Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2012 8:08 PM To: Antique Phonograph List Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Anyone know an early electric phono repair man? You're welcome Edward. The rubber idler wheel can sometimes be reconditioned -softened and surface-dressed with a chemical. If it has a notable flat spot (from decades resting against the inside of the turntable rim under tension), it will need to be replaced. When these get hard it transfers all kinds of noise to the platter which then acts like a diaphragm to magnify the noise. The motor board, if the motor is bolted directly to it, then acts like a sound board, further amplifying the rattle. The original stylus might have been a metal alloy. One such was called Osmium, which would give more plays than an ordinary steel needle. It could also have been a jewel-tipped metal shank. Electric Admirals from that era with no radio are pretty rare. The repairs are pretty straightforward. Best of luck, Andrew On Sep 2, 2012, at 5:42 PM, keeper...@aol.com wrote: Andrew, Thank You for taking the time to respond as you did, with all that helpful information! I guessed aright that if the symptoms were described, someone who knows them would indicate a prognosis. I think that since these machines are fairly rare, and yet when working properly play records with a lovely, iconic sound, they should be restored. They're easier on the old records than a Victrola, also, if you like to play them a lot, as I do. I have a great GE phonograph, with an AM radio, that I would estimate to have been available in the 40s, extrapolating from your description of this Admir al. The original stylus must be gone. I got it with a standard steel needle in it. And yes, the garbled music was from the record. There is no radio with this unit, it only plays records. I'll wait and see if anyone in the area responds, but appreciate
Re: [Phono-L] Capitol Master recording question...
If the record is vinyl (Gisele MacKensie recorded mostly in the postwar era), with an unusual handwritten label it is probably a test pressing. The word master probably referred to the master tape number(s). If the record is a nitrocellulose lacquer (thin plastic coatings on an aluminum substrate), it was probably a reference recording. These were test cuts made on lacquer and submitted for approval by the AR department before the pairing and final sound was released for commercial production. Cutting reference lacquers was standard procedure at most of the major record labels. They were especially common in later days when post-production mastering (meaning EQ tweaking and level setting) was routinely done after the final master tape mix was OKd by the producer. Which means the sound of the disc was routinely modified from the final mix and needed to be re-approved by the producer. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Vinyl Visions vinyl.visi...@live.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 8:38 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Capitol Master recording question... I discovered a record that I am not sure about and wondered if anyone might enlighten me on it. It is a Capitol Master #7623-10 Wishin by Gisele MacKensie / Flip side is Master #9624 Good Bye Sweetheart by Gisele MacKensieAll of the numbers and titles are hand written. The label has a date of 1/52 on the bottom and a sticker with M2111 written on it.This was apparently published in 1983, as I found a record with these titles and that date on Capitol, but I can't find any info on it as far as being a Master copy... any ideas???Curt ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Capitol Master recording question...
One would think that test pressings would be valuable because of their scarcity - only a few were pressed for most releases, and those were distributed mostly to in-house production people, and maybe a few given to the talent. But if you follow them in various auctions, you find that they don't bring much in the collector market. The exception would be a test pressing that did NOT get commercially produced. But you have to be pretty savvy to know which pairings and/or takes in test pressings did not get commercial approval. So a commercially unreleased take from Elvis or Louis Armstrong might be worth something, but generally test pressings are not highly valuable. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Vinyl Visions vinyl.visi...@live.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 10:39 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Capitol Master recording question... Hi Greg,Thanks for the info... it is a vinyl record with handwritten entries on a printed Capitol label that appears to be made for these type of recordings. If it is, in fact a test pressing, do these records have any particular value or is it just an oddity? I have had some of the aluminum based reference recordings before - they seemed to be similar to the type that you recorded yourself. I am just not very familiar with the test pressings and couldn't find anything about them.Curt From: gbogan...@charter.net To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 21:49:02 -0400 Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Capitol Master recording question... If the record is vinyl (Gisele MacKensie recorded mostly in the postwar era), with an unusual handwritten label it is probably a test pressing. The word master probably referred to the master tape number(s). If the record is a nitrocellulose lacquer (thin plastic coatings on an aluminum substrate), it was probably a reference recording. These were test cuts made on lacquer and submitted for approval by the AR department before the pairing and final sound was released for commercial production. Cutting reference lacquers was standard procedure at most of the major record labels. They were especially common in later days when post-production mastering (meaning EQ tweaking and level setting) was routinely done after the final master tape mix was OKd by the producer. Which means the sound of the disc was routinely modified from the final mix and needed to be re-approved by the producer. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Vinyl Visions vinyl.visi...@live.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 8:38 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Capitol Master recording question... I discovered a record that I am not sure about and wondered if anyone might enlighten me on it. It is a Capitol Master #7623-10 Wishin by Gisele MacKensie / Flip side is Master #9624 Good Bye Sweetheart by Gisele MacKensieAll of the numbers and titles are hand written. The label has a date of 1/52 on the bottom and a sticker with M2111 written on it.This was apparently published in 1983, as I found a record with these titles and that date on Capitol, but I can't find any info on it as far as being a Master copy... any ideas???Curt ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Partly OT, Victor Theremin site
Hi Andrew, You may or may not know that Dr. Robert Moog, the inventor of the Moog synthesizer, started his career as a consequence of his fascination with the original RCA theremin. He started restoring them, then he decided to make new ones. One thing led to another, and the Moog Music company was formed. Today, Moog Music is alive, well, and thriving in Asheville, NC (my stomping grounds). They are still restoring original theremins as well as making and selling new ones, in addition to all their newer synthesizer equipment. A lot of musicians descend on Asheville to visit Moog Music and play with their toys. Asheville started a music gathering called Moogfest two years ago which is a celebration of all things Moog. It's been a huge success, and more are in the planning stages. You might want to contact Moog or one of their websites to spread the news of your website. Lots of musicians and others interested in the theremin should see your postings there. Here's the scoop on Moogfest. Another one will probably be scheduled this year around October: http://www.moogfest.com/ Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Andrew Baron a...@popyrus.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2012 9:11 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Partly OT, Victor Theremin site Hi all ~ My Victor Theremin* colleague and I have just co-created a new website: rcatheremin.com For those who may be interested, here you will find practical but heretofore unavailable information about the original 1929 theremins, the first manufactured musical instrument to employ no acoustic or mechanical means of reproducing of sound. In Victor advertising, it was stated: Not a phonograph---Not a radio---Not like anything you have ever heard or seen! There are Victor records of this unique first electronic musical instrument that date from 1930 (Victor 25130 is one that some of you may have seen), and the instrument itself (which is played without touching it) was developed during the time that RCA was busy acquiring the Victor Talking Machine Company. If any of you own or know of someone who has one of these original Victor Theremins, please let me know about it, as we are actively researching the survivors. Both Mike and I own RCA theremins, and are not in the market to buy, but rather are more interested in documenting the survivors and sharing what we've learned about these rare and unusual instruments. I hope you enjoy the site, Andrew Baron Santa Fe (*As originally advertised in 1929, also referred to in brochures as the RCA Theremin) ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Paul Baker's email
Here's the email address I have for Paul Baker: pabcla...@aol.com Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Vinyl Visions vinyl.visi...@live.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 10:21 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Paul Baker's email That adelphia.net email address is obsolete. Adelphia went out of business several years ago and were taken over by Time Warner. From: c5...@aol.com Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 21:40:21 -0500 To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: Re: [Phono-L] wanted to buy I think this is Paul Bakers e-mail _classm@adelphia.net_ (mailto:cla...@adelphia.net) . Thanks In a message dated 2/23/2012 10:56:20 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, jdcoffm...@comcast.net writes: Hi,I'm am looking for a Columbia AG case a Columbia BF lid.Any help would be greatly appreciated.Thanks,John ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Does anyone know how to make a Jones Motrola _safe_?
Try it, Barry. I'll stand by and laugh. I just got a zap from a Fisher FM tuner that I routinely have plugged in to an isolation transformer (together with a variable AC transformer) as I do with all things on my workbench. Many old tube sets have capacitors from the line cord wiring to the chassis which can be pretty tickly, especially when these sets did not include the third chassis grounding wire in the line cord. I accidentally touched the output side of the Fisher transformer - that would be DOUBLE the isolation in place. 120 volts AC - or more - will bite you when you touch it, isolation xfmr or not. Isolation transformers are good for preventing large currents from flowing when you short things out which can blow fuses and start fires, but they don't do anything to reduce the voltage - that's what their purpose is. Greg - Original Message - From: Barry Kasindorf ba...@barrykasindorf.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 9:09 AM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Does anyone know how to make a Jones Motrola _safe_? Not true Greg. You would have to touch 2 different places with potential to get a shock and the case can't have that. Unless the isolation transformer is bad it makers it safe. That is how you can use those AC/DC sets with the case hot safely. The isolation transformer isolates it from ground completely. On 2/16/2012 10:10 PM, Greg Bogantz wrote: An isolation transformer would not prevent getting a shock from the case of the Motrola if it develops internal leakage. Grounding the case of the unit as described previously is the best plan. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Philip Carli philip_ca...@pittsford.monroe.edu To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 8:45 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Does anyone know how to make a Jones Motrola _safe_? Many thanks! Another suggestion I've had is the use of an isolation transformer at the plug - any thoughts on that? PC From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] on behalf of Greg Bogantz [gbogan...@charter.net] Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 8:27 PM To: Antique Phonograph List Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Does anyone know how to make a Jones Motrola _safe_? I believe the Motrola has a metal case. The danger can occur if there is electrical leakage from the internal wiring to the case and its attached metal parts which can occur due to carbonized insulation that can begin to develop a lower resistance. I would recommend first testing with an ohmmeter to determine if there is already leakage from either of the wires leading from the motor to the case. An ohmmeter reading should indicate a very high or infinite resistance from either wire to the case when things are correct. If you measure any significantly lower resistance, the internal wiring will need to be redone or repaired. If there is good isolation from the motor wires to the case, I would recommend replacing the line cord with a modern three-wire cord with a 3-terminal AC plug. Connect the black and white wires to the motor circuit as was done in the original 2-wire cord. Then connect the green wire to a screw on the metal case. This will privide a grounding connection from the case to your household earthing system. If electrical leakage should develop in the future, it will be routed thru the green wire to your household ground system (assuming you plug the cord into a modern 3-wire outlet). In the worst case, it will blow a fuse or circuit breaker rather than leaving the system a shock hazard. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Philip Carli philip_ca...@pittsford.monroe.edu To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 7:08 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Does anyone know how to make a Jones Motrola _safe_? I have a Jones Motrola I'm trying to rewire, but I read that they can be dangerous in their original ungrounded state? Any ideas on how I can deal with this? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, Philip Carli This email message and any attachments may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are prohibited from using the information in any way, including but not limited to disclosure of, copying, forwarding or acting in reliance on the contents. If you have received this email by error, please immediately notify me by return email and delete it from your email system. Thank you. ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org This email message and any attachments may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are prohibited
Re: [Phono-L] Does anyone know how to make a Jones Motrola _safe_?
I believe the Motrola has a metal case. The danger can occur if there is electrical leakage from the internal wiring to the case and its attached metal parts which can occur due to carbonized insulation that can begin to develop a lower resistance. I would recommend first testing with an ohmmeter to determine if there is already leakage from either of the wires leading from the motor to the case. An ohmmeter reading should indicate a very high or infinite resistance from either wire to the case when things are correct. If you measure any significantly lower resistance, the internal wiring will need to be redone or repaired. If there is good isolation from the motor wires to the case, I would recommend replacing the line cord with a modern three-wire cord with a 3-terminal AC plug. Connect the black and white wires to the motor circuit as was done in the original 2-wire cord. Then connect the green wire to a screw on the metal case. This will privide a grounding connection from the case to your household earthing system. If electrical leakage should develop in the future, it will be routed thru the green wire to your household ground system (assuming you plug the cord into a modern 3-wire outlet). In the worst case, it will blow a fuse or circuit breaker rather than leaving the system a shock hazard. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Philip Carli philip_ca...@pittsford.monroe.edu To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 7:08 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Does anyone know how to make a Jones Motrola _safe_? I have a Jones Motrola I'm trying to rewire, but I read that they can be dangerous in their original ungrounded state? Any ideas on how I can deal with this? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, Philip Carli This email message and any attachments may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are prohibited from using the information in any way, including but not limited to disclosure of, copying, forwarding or acting in reliance on the contents. If you have received this email by error, please immediately notify me by return email and delete it from your email system. Thank you. ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Does anyone know how to make a Jones Motrola _safe_?
An isolation transformer would not prevent getting a shock from the case of the Motrola if it develops internal leakage. Grounding the case of the unit as described previously is the best plan. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Philip Carli philip_ca...@pittsford.monroe.edu To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 8:45 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Does anyone know how to make a Jones Motrola _safe_? Many thanks! Another suggestion I've had is the use of an isolation transformer at the plug - any thoughts on that? PC From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] on behalf of Greg Bogantz [gbogan...@charter.net] Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 8:27 PM To: Antique Phonograph List Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Does anyone know how to make a Jones Motrola _safe_? I believe the Motrola has a metal case. The danger can occur if there is electrical leakage from the internal wiring to the case and its attached metal parts which can occur due to carbonized insulation that can begin to develop a lower resistance. I would recommend first testing with an ohmmeter to determine if there is already leakage from either of the wires leading from the motor to the case. An ohmmeter reading should indicate a very high or infinite resistance from either wire to the case when things are correct. If you measure any significantly lower resistance, the internal wiring will need to be redone or repaired. If there is good isolation from the motor wires to the case, I would recommend replacing the line cord with a modern three-wire cord with a 3-terminal AC plug. Connect the black and white wires to the motor circuit as was done in the original 2-wire cord. Then connect the green wire to a screw on the metal case. This will privide a grounding connection from the case to your household earthing system. If electrical leakage should develop in the future, it will be routed thru the green wire to your household ground system (assuming you plug the cord into a modern 3-wire outlet). In the worst case, it will blow a fuse or circuit breaker rather than leaving the system a shock hazard. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Philip Carli philip_ca...@pittsford.monroe.edu To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 7:08 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Does anyone know how to make a Jones Motrola _safe_? I have a Jones Motrola I'm trying to rewire, but I read that they can be dangerous in their original ungrounded state? Any ideas on how I can deal with this? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, Philip Carli This email message and any attachments may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are prohibited from using the information in any way, including but not limited to disclosure of, copying, forwarding or acting in reliance on the contents. If you have received this email by error, please immediately notify me by return email and delete it from your email system. Thank you. ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org This email message and any attachments may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are prohibited from using the information in any way, including but not limited to disclosure of, copying, forwarding or acting in reliance on the contents. If you have received this email by error, please immediately notify me by return email and delete it from your email system. Thank you. ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Does anyone know how to make a Jones Motrola _safe_?
Potmetal can't be soldered, typically. You can use any screw anywhere inside the unit that is electrically connected to the case for the purpose of attaching the green grounding wire. Make sure that your connection point is NOT connected to the motor wiring - test with an ohmmeter. A motor frame screw might be more convenient. The metal motor frame is likely touching the case at some point which is sufficient to provide grounding. Or you can attach the grounding wire by clamping it or in any suitable fashion that provides a decent electrical connection. Test your chosen connection point with an ohmmeter measurement from that point to some outside exposed metal on the case to confirm that it is electrically connected to the case. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Philip Carli philip_ca...@pittsford.monroe.edu To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 9:58 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Does anyone know how to make a Jones Motrola _safe_? Would soldering the green wire to the case do as well as a screw? I believe the case is pot metal and tapping it for a screw might shatter the whole thing. Philip Carli From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] on behalf of Greg Bogantz [gbogan...@charter.net] Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 8:27 PM To: Antique Phonograph List Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Does anyone know how to make a Jones Motrola _safe_? I believe the Motrola has a metal case. The danger can occur if there is electrical leakage from the internal wiring to the case and its attached metal parts which can occur due to carbonized insulation that can begin to develop a lower resistance. I would recommend first testing with an ohmmeter to determine if there is already leakage from either of the wires leading from the motor to the case. An ohmmeter reading should indicate a very high or infinite resistance from either wire to the case when things are correct. If you measure any significantly lower resistance, the internal wiring will need to be redone or repaired. If there is good isolation from the motor wires to the case, I would recommend replacing the line cord with a modern three-wire cord with a 3-terminal AC plug. Connect the black and white wires to the motor circuit as was done in the original 2-wire cord. Then connect the green wire to a screw on the metal case. This will privide a grounding connection from the case to your household earthing system. If electrical leakage should develop in the future, it will be routed thru the green wire to your household ground system (assuming you plug the cord into a modern 3-wire outlet). In the worst case, it will blow a fuse or circuit breaker rather than leaving the system a shock hazard. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Philip Carli philip_ca...@pittsford.monroe.edu To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 7:08 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Does anyone know how to make a Jones Motrola _safe_? I have a Jones Motrola I'm trying to rewire, but I read that they can be dangerous in their original ungrounded state? Any ideas on how I can deal with this? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, Philip Carli This email message and any attachments may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are prohibited from using the information in any way, including but not limited to disclosure of, copying, forwarding or acting in reliance on the contents. If you have received this email by error, please immediately notify me by return email and delete it from your email system. Thank you. ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org This email message and any attachments may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are prohibited from using the information in any way, including but not limited to disclosure of, copying, forwarding or acting in reliance on the contents. If you have received this email by error, please immediately notify me by return email and delete it from your email system. Thank you. ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Amplifier and speaker for an Edison R-7 Radio
Hi Don, The Edison R6 and R7 were 1930 model radios. They use the same chassis which are usually painted a gold color. But none of the other Edison models use the 1930 chassis. The model R8 was also offered in 1930, but it was a rebadged 1929 model R5 with more gingerbread added to the cabinet. It uses the 1929 chassis. You might want to post your request to the Electrola Group on Yahoo. Those readers are specifically interested in early electronic radios and phonos. Also, you could try posting to one of the several sites that specialize in antique radios. These Edison chassis are not common but they aren't impossible to find, either. They usually don't bring much money as there isn't as much interest in them as in other makes. All of the Edison radio products from 1928 thru 1930 used the Peerless single-turn voice coil speaker. These speakers must be paired with the correct output transformer which is significantly different from the typical transformer. Finding this pairing isn't usually a problem because the Peerless output transformer is usually enclosed in the base of the speaker assembly. So if you find the speaker, you've probably also got the transformer, providing that it's good. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Don Henry phonowo...@hotmail.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 5:40 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Amplifier and speaker for an Edison R-7 Radio Anyone out there know where I might find an amplifier and speaker for an Edison R-7 Radio? I have a lovely cabinet and tuner but am missing these items. Are any of the other models interchangeable with this one? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks! Don Henry ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] OT: clockwork automaton article in NY Times today
Congratulations, Andy, on getting this priceless piece of history restored to full functionality. That must have been a privelege as well as great fun to do. What a wonderful challenge in trying to figure out what each piece of the mechanism did. I'm constantly amazed at the delicacy and precision of mechanisms such as watches and timepieces that were made hundreds of years ago. I have often wondered how these precision mechs were even made so many years ago before the availability of modern materials and processes. I'm always fascinated by this stuff. Thanks for the link. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Andrew Baron a...@popyrus.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 11:00 PM Subject: [Phono-L] OT: clockwork automaton article in NY Times today For those phonograph enthusiasts whose interests extend into other mechanical realms, Today's edition of the New York Times (Science Times section) ran an article about the drawing/writing automaton that restored for Philadelphia's Franklin Institute Science Museum. Here's the link: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/27/science/maillardet-automaton-inspired-martin-scorseses-film-hugo.html?_r=2seid=autosmid=tw-nytimespagewanted=all Best to all, Andrew Baron ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Edison Diamond Disc Record NumberWanted
Tim Gracyk's book Edison Diamond Disc Re-Creations lists several pairings for this 1052 matrix number: One record number 50008 has it paired with matrix 1001 titled No One to Love, Mixed Quartet Record #50018 has it matched with matrix 941 titled Fairest Rose Waltz, Charles Daab Record #50021 has the same pairing as #50018 Record #50022 has it matched with matrix 1053 titled Flower Song, Violin, Cello, Flute, Harp Whispering Flowers by Reed Orchestra is listed as matrix #2367, paired with matrix 2048 Angel's Dream Waltz, Band, on record #50037. There are some other pairings of these in the 8 series: Record 80001 has matrix 1052 paired with matrix 999 Berceuse-Jocelyn, Cello. Whispering Flowers is also listed as matrix 939, paired with matrix 1250 On the Road to Mandalay, Thomas Chalmers, on record 80003. Record 80022 has this matrix with the same pairing as 50022. I have #80022, complete with the box that it originally came in. Some of the earliest Edison DDs were packaged in a flat chipboard display box rather than in a paper sleeve. These deluxe boxes had a color picture and written descriptions of the selections on the front. There may be other pairings, but I didn't find them in a cursory scan of the book. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Jim Cartwright jim...@earthlink.net To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 4:57 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Edison Diamond Disc Record NumberWanted I am cataloging my records have one of the early etched label Edison diamond discs that does not include the record number on either it's face or edge for which I have been unable to find a record number.It is: The Bloom is on the Rye Henry R. Bishop, Composer - Tenor baritone Orchestra Accompaniment (matrix number 1052) (I've found other couplings of this listed as sung by Harry Anthony Charles Harrison)// Whispering Flowers Von Blon, Composer Band - Reed Instruments (matrix number as best I can make out 939) I any of you know the number of this record, I'd like to know. Many thanks! Jim Cartwright Immortal Performances, Inc. ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] ristaucrat jukebox information request
These Ristaucrat tabletop jukes use a modified RCA RP-168 record changer, the first design developed by RCA in 1949. But the modifications are fairly extensive as they include a mechanism that returns the record stack back up to the top of the changer. So some of the changer parts will be the same as those of the RP-168 which is still pretty available on eBay. Service info on the RP-168 is available on Howard W. Sams Photofact data sheets. Sams probably also had a service info bulletin on the Ristaucrat model itself. For the more specific juke parts, you can check with one of the several jukebox boneyards and parts suppliers thru Google. Here's one of the better ones: http://www.victoryglass.com/ You might also want to visit the Electrola Group on Yahoo which is dedicated to the discussion of early electronic record playing equipment. We have several juke owners in that group who might be able to help you. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Bob Maffit maff...@bresnan.net To: 'Antique Phonograph List' phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 5:37 PM Subject: [Phono-L] ristaucrat jukebox information request Phono Folks: I apologize in the event this is viewed by some as off topic however, I think this lists expertise in locating phonograph related information is needed in this case. I have pasted a little information on the ristaucrat mini jukeboxes made in the early 50s below. At present, I can't find anyone who can work on mine as those who I have approached state, no information is available which could be used to guide repairs or remanufacture parts. Since this list often can find Patten and other needed specifications, I placed my hope here. In the event you can assist, or have a referral for me, much appreciated. Later Bob The following small jukeboxes all use 45 RPM records, capitalizing on the shift to these 7 records by the release of the Seeburg M100B. These little jukeboxes were marketed as cost effective stopgap while major jukebox manufacturers were still scrambling to shift production to 45 RPM models. Ristaucrat 45 - 1950 Ristaucrat, Inc was located at 1216 E. Wisconsin Ave., Appleton, Wisconsin, USA and announced the 45 Ristaucrat 45 Non-Selective Ristaucrat in Billboard Magazine on June 24, 1950. Initially, over 1200 were placed on location and production was stepped up to 100 per day per press releases. The Ristaucrat 45 was available in either light or dark hardwood finish. According to the manufacturer, it Plays 12-45 RPM Records, restacks automatically ... is set for 5 cent play or 2 for 5 cents ... is lightweight, weighs only 30 lbs. Measures a compact 12 high, 12 3/4 deep and 16 high The known serial number range (only 4 data points) for this model ranges from 1099 to 3435. Given a conservative estimate based on known serial numbers, then only 2400 were produced, it is more likely that the serial number range started at 0001, so an estimated production of 3400+ can be assumed. Ristaucrat 45S - 1951-52 About a year after the release of the Ristaucrat 45, the S-45 was announced. A July 1951 ad in Coin Ristaucrat 45SMachine Journal stated: Low cost selective Music for all locations. 12 record, twin speaker 45 RPM Selective Phone ... the Ristaucrat S-45 ... Plays 12-45 RPM records with smooth, noiseless operation. Records Play in rotation - no long, noisy, restacking periods between selections. Twin Speakers - only the S-45 has two speakers to give a true, clear tone to any record The specifications for this record play was: Weight, 40 Lbs, 13 1/2 wide, 16 1/2 deep and 17 high. The known serial number range (only 4 data points) for this model ranges from 50408 to 52898. Given a conservative estimate based on known serial numbers, then only 2500 were produced, it is more likely that the serial number range started at 50001, so an estimated production of 3000+ can be assumed. Block quote end ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Black Patti... Black Swan
I have to agree with you Glenn. I'm a little dismayed at all the dissing of poor old Guy Lumbago here. When I was a kid, Lumbago was already pretty much of a has-been, being relegated to performing once a year on a New Year's Eve TV show. The Beatles were fab and no kid would be caught dead listening to anything his parents would remotely have liked. That included Sinatra and Basie. I thought Guy was really square and didn't know anybody who listened to him with the exception of one of my tekkie friends. I still don't know what that was about, but as I have aged and mellowed and started collecting 1930s vintage radios, I find that hearing the Royal Canadians coming thru the speaker of an Atwater Kent just seems right. Together with Benny Goodman, Glenn Miller and all the rest of the performers of the day. I have actually come to even like Carmen Lombardo's vocals. They are so uniquely cornball that they define the Lumbago sound just as much as the trademark toodling saxophones. And I think Guy's dueling dual piano treatments are some of the most upbeat and enjoyable to be heard. These two pieanny bangers were really talented, despite the corny arrangements. You won't hear many clams from their spirited playing. Guy's music is just plain fun, and I enjoy it quite a lot these days. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Glenn Longwell majesticrec...@snet.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2011 1:51 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Black Patti... Black Swan My neighbor, who is 45 and female, loves Guy Lombardo. So does her father. In general she likes the big band era and that sweet music. My mother-in-law also likes him. So, he certainly had his fans and still does. And, yes, many of the Decca Lombardo discs I've come across look like they were loved a bit. Takes all kinds... Glenn From: Steven Medved steve_nor...@msn.com To: Phono-l phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Tue, March 1, 2011 8:51:01 AM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Black Patti... Black Swan All the people that liked Lombarda are either gone or they refuse to admit it, have you ever seen one of his records that looked played? Somebody must have liked Lombardo - there sure are a lot of his records around... :) (although, they might have survived since no one played them) From: steve_nor...@msn.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 12:56:51 -0500 Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Black Patti... Black Swan They are not half bad they are half good. But to take a Black Patti and a Black Swan and give Jerry a Welk and a Lombardo in exchange..that is sad. I think the early Guy Lombardo's on the Okeh label from the late 1920s are not half bad actually. Same goes with Lawrence Welk from the late 1920s. -Original Message- From: Steven Medved steve_nor...@msn.com To: Phono-l phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Mon, Feb 28, 2011 10:37 am Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Black Patti... Black Swan hose are impossible to enjoy no matter what the song. ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4qcCIH0yg0 NAH ITS A GUY LOMBARDO That's right... you snatched a Black Swan out of my hands and gave me a Glen Miller saying I'd enjoy it more. Jerry __ hono-L mailing list ttp://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] New Phonogram
Well, the English must have eventually figgered it out. As a biker and with a brother who still owns a 1970 Norton Commando, I know what you're saying. When I was in the engineering lab at RCA Records, we purchased from England an EMI record testing machine that contained a Garrard 401 turntable, sometime in the late 1970s. I took the tester apart to check on something (which wasn't working, of course) and just busted out laughing when I spied a puddle of oil underneath the platter bearing, pooled on the bottom pan of the cabinet. Yep, it's English all right. I called all my biker buddies over to have a look at it, and we all had a good laugh over it. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: William Zucca rochr...@gmail.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:46 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] New Phonogram Did you hear the one about why there was never a successful phonograph industry in England? (answer:) Because they couldn't figure out how to make the machines break down and start leaking oil every week. Ha Ha, GrnMountain Bill On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 12:32 PM, john9...@pacbell.net wrote: Did you hear about the dyslexic anorexic? She never thought she was fat enough. -Original Message- From: Tom Jordan tom...@msn.com Sender: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:25:25 To: 'Antique Phonograph List'phono-l@oldcrank.org Reply-To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: Re: [Phono-L] New Phonogram I can't help it! :0) Did you hear about the dyslexic atheist? He laid awake at night wondering Is there a dog? -Original Message- From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] On Behalf Of Peter Fraser Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 11:00 AM To: Antique Phonograph List Subject: Re: [Phono-L] New Phonogram Dog is my copilot! Sent from my iPhone -- Peter pjfra...@mac.com On Jan 20, 2011, at 2:48 AM, john robles john9...@pacbell.net wrote: No rush..my god passed away and left me with $1600 in vet bills...my phono purchases have sort of taken a downturn for the moment... Thanks John --- On Wed, 1/19/11, D P Ingram dar...@ingram.fi wrote: From: D P Ingram dar...@ingram.fi Subject: Re: [Phono-L] New Phonogram To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Date: Wednesday, January 19, 2011, 9:28 PM Hi. Still looking. Not found any (duplicates yet) but am sorting out our duplicate holdings so found a lot more other stuff (phono, gram, radio ) :) Best, Darren ¦ D P Ingram ¦ Ab Ingram Oy ¦ ¦ darren at ingram.fi ¦ www.ingram.fi ¦ ¦ ¦ MUSIC LIBRARY FINLAND - www.musiclibrary.fi ¦ ¦ +358 6 781 0275 (FIN) ¦ extn 8001 ¦ On 31 dec 2010, at 19.05, john robles wrote: Thank you Darren, no hurry. John --- On Fri, 12/31/10, D P Ingram dar...@ingram.fi wrote: From: D P Ingram dar...@ingram.fi Subject: Re: [Phono-L] New Phonogram To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Date: Friday, December 31, 2010, 8:27 AM Possibly a couple but I cannot check for a day or two until after the holiday. Darren ¦ D P Ingram ¦ Ab Ingram Oy ¦ ¦ darren at ingram.fi ¦ www.ingram.fi ¦ ¦ ¦ MUSIC LIBRARY FINLAND - www.musiclibrary.fi ¦ ¦ +358 6 781 0275 (FIN) ¦ extn 8001 ¦ On 31 dec 2010, at 14.23, john robles wrote: Does anyone have copies of the New Phonogram available for sale?? Repros are acceptable. Thanks John Robles ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] Lionel Phono Parts/Reproducers???
Yes, Lionel made cheap childrens' phonos for a period of time in the 1950s. Yes, this was the same company that made the model trains. Some of the phonos were acoustic and some were electronic models. They turn up on eBay regularly. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Vinyl Visions vinyl.visi...@live.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 10:57 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Lionel Phono Parts/Reproducers??? Anybody ever hear of a Lionel phonograph or reproducer? http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=350430821863ssPageName=ADME:B:SS:US:1123 ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] Early cygnet horn without the spring
I have an early 10 panel cygnet horn and springless crane on an Edison Fireside. As you surmise, the system doesn't work very well as the force placed on the carriage by the horn varies with the position of the carriage. It happens to work on my particular example because the rubber coupling from my reproducer to the horn is old and somewhat loose. This allows the rubber coupler to move vertically a bit as the carriage moves which results in a more uniform carriage pressure. But this original setup was not satisfactory, I'm sure, and that's why the later versions use the spring to suspend the horn from the crane. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Steven Medved steve_nor...@msn.com To: phonolist phonol...@yahoogroups.com; Phono-l phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 9:08 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Early cygnet horn without the spring Hello, Does anyone have an early cygnet horn without the spring? How do these work without the coil spring? I have seen them but it does not look like a workable system to me. Steve ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] Help with reproducer ID
That's from a Victor RE-45 or RE-75, most likely. It's the standard horseshoe magnetic pickup that was used on many early electric machines of the 1929 - 32 period. The drawn metal cover would usually be embossed with the appropriate logo for whatever set maker was using it. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Dennis Back back...@yahoo.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 4:09 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Help with reproducer ID Can anyone identify this reproducer and what machine is goes on? I know it's from a Victor machine, as it obviously has the Nipper. It also says Victor under the Berliner phono, so I assume it is from the USA, a pre-dates the RCA takeover. http://i1122.photobucket.com/albums/l523/Dustcollectors/vicelrep1.jpg http://i1122.photobucket.com/albums/l523/Dustcollectors/vicelrep2.jpg http://i1122.photobucket.com/albums/l523/Dustcollectors/vicelrep3.jpg Thanks for looking, Dennis ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] Diamond D and heavy weight C reproducer
Steve, I've never actually seen either a Diamond D or a heavy weight C. What's the difference between them? Can you post some pictures of them? Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Steven Medved steve_nor...@msn.com To: Phono-l phono-l@oldcrank.org; phonolist phonol...@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, September 25, 2010 7:30 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Diamond D and heavy weight C reproducer Hello all, This will have a very narrow band of interest and will likely not produce any responses but I will try anyhow. I collect photos and serial number of reproducers, below are ones I am interested in. First I am interested in diamond B reproducers with serial numbers above 108,000. Second I am interested in any diamond C with the brass sound tube that is painted black. Third I am interested in any diamond C above 300,000. If you do not want to provide photos a description would be appreciated. All info will be kept confidential. You can cut my e-mail and just reply to me if you like. I am interested in information about the Amberola 60 and 80. First if the reproducers are rebuilt how do they sound when compared with the Amberola 50? I have heard the Diamond D does not sound that good but I wonder how much difference the larger horn makes. Do you have any idea how many were made and how many survive? I just recently noticed the extra weight on the Diamond D and the Heavy weight C is made of lead. I have only 2 of the heavy weight attachments and just the weights from 2 diamond D reproducers and 2 of the heavy weight C reproducers. The serial numbers from the Diamond D reproducers I have seen and my weights are in the 307,000 and 308,000 range. The serial number of the only heavy weight C I know of is in the A31000 range. Fortunately for me the diamond D weights have the serial numbers. I also noticed both the diamond B and C weights started out narrow and were widened. I will have to see if I can tell when this happened. Regarding the 80 I know of one in New Zealand, one in Canada, two that people I of know own in the US and one that sold on eBay. The NZ one has a serial number of 1015. 1033 and 1071 are the serial numbers I have for two of the machines I am aware of. If the serial number started with 1000 then at least 71 were made, but this is merely an uneducated guess on my part. The heavy weight is made universal so it will fit both the diamond D or the heavy weight C. I have not seen any Diamond D or C above 309,000 and they share serial numbers. I have seen a diamond C nickel plated and made of pot metal with a serial number over 308,000 so Edison made the diamond C and D at the same time. Any information on the heavy weight diamond C would be appreciated. My black pot metal one is 306702. Some facts about the diamond C. All the tops are made of pot metal, according to the Frow book the sound tubes were brass for about two years. 82804 is the highest nickel plated one I have seen with the brass tube, all of them appear to be nickel plated up to 93169 which is painted black and has a brass tube, I do not know who painted it. 95497 has the pot metal tube and is painted black. I do not know when the diamond B A series started, but 108700 is the highest of the regular series. The first ones have the same limit pin as the model O, but by 11965 the later limit pin was used. The late O and N reproducers also have the later pin. Steve ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] Need Power Transformer
I believe that McIntosh still makes replacement transformers for their old tube equipment - they made the originals. But be prepared to get up off a good chunk of change to buy one. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: jim...@earthlink.net To: Phono-L@oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 10:54 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Need Power Transformer One of my MacIntosh MC-60 amplifiers has blown its power transformer (M-171) the repairman has requested that I look for a replacement. I realize that this piece of equipment may be a few decades too new for most of those who post on Phono-L but thought I'd give it a try.Many thanks for whatever help in finding a replacement power transformer you all may be able to provide! Jim Cartwright Immortal Performances, Inc. jim...@earthlink.net ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] Yankee Prince Phonograph
Ron, I second that emotion. APM was already a has-been when I started collecting some years ago, so I haven't seen any of the information that has been published there. I'm probably not alone as I suspect many of our current collectors don't have any or much knowledge of APM or The New Amberola Graphic and its articles. I don't know what kind of copyright issues there may be, but I'd like to see some of the more timeless articles and studies from these early newsletters and magazines republished in ITG. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Ron L'Herault lhera...@bu.edu To: 'Antique Phonograph List' phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Monday, July 05, 2010 9:08 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Yankee Prince Phonograph Maybe a From the files of the APM would be a good column for In The Groove. Ron L -Original Message- From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] On Behalf Of phonop...@aol.com Sent: Monday, July 05, 2010 7:34 AM To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Yankee Prince Phonograph Hi, all --- The complete story of the Yankee Prince talking machine and its relation to other I'Neill-James products and the entire Chicago talking machine scene can be read about in (some would say excruciating) detail in a number of articles I wrote beginning in the early 1970s for publications like the APM (Antique Phonograph Monthly) and the Talking Machine Review International. Many older collectors have these publications in their libraries, but if you don't know anyone who might have them, the story will also be found in a few of the books George Paul and I wrote, primarily The Talking Machine, an Illustrated Compendium and Discovering Antique Phonographs. These books are commonly available from a variety of sources, including www.phonophan.com and eBay. It depends on how much you really want to know about O'Neill-James, because I got into it on the obsessive level -- I mean, right down to quoting from the amateur poetry of Arthur J. O'Neill. But if all you want it a one-paragraph precis of the story, e-mail me off-line and I'll send you the quick and slick version. Cheers, Tim Fabrizio phonophan PO Box 747 Henrietta, NY 14467 TEL 585 582 1586 FAX 585 582 2624 Web site: www.phonophan.com ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] Unreleased Diamond Disc?
According to the book Edison Diamond Disc Re-creations, Records Artists, 1910-1929 obtained from Tim Gracyk's website, the DD #50067 is indicated to have been coupled (R and L sides selected) on July 21, 1913 and listed in the catalog in August 1913. The selection was cut out of the catalog on December 6, 1916. There is no indication that this disc was unreleased. There is only one matrix number listed for the R side as #1250 On the Road to Mandalay by Thomas Chalmers Chorus. The L side matrix is #1105 Danny Deever by Marcus Kellerman. No other matrix numbers or artists are shown for this selection. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Glenn Longwell majesticrec...@snet.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Friday, June 25, 2010 9:39 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Unreleased Diamond Disc? This list has been helpful before in my finds of Diamond Discs. This time the story has a twist. A colleague of mine's ancestor (I think great Uncle) was Marcus Kellerman, a baritone. Here's a little bit of info on him (http://sdrcdata.lib.uiowa.edu/libsdrc/details.jsp?id=/kellerman/3page=1ui=1). We found a copy of a cylinder he did, Danny Deever, on the UCSB website, an Amberol from 1911, number 682. In the documentation I have it shows that he also sang this song on Diamond Disc, 50067, with matrices 1105-A, B and C in June 1912. All were shown as rejected. So I assumed this was never released commercially. However, what I found was 50067 with matrix number 1105-5. Unfortunately, in this small collection I saw this is the only disc I brought home because I knew that Danny Deever was sung by Kellerman (there was another version sung by Arthur Middleton) and was hoping this was the one by Kellerman for my friend. If not for that I wouldn't have bought it because most of the records, including this one, had lam cracks. Having a number for the matrix makes it a quite interesting find. My question is whether this record 50067 with Kellerman's version of Danny Deever ever released commercially. I know there are people on this list with the right Edison books to probably tell this. I'm not sure how accurate my information is. If it truly wasn't released the rest of the records might be of similar nature - perhaps another dealer stash find. There were probably 10-12 of them and didn't really take a closer look because of the lam cracks on them. Thanks for any help. Glenn ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] Vitaphone Tone Arm
I have a Vitaphone consolette that looks different from most of the pictures that I see. It's a model 60 and is similar to the model 100 but the cabinet is much simpler. But the significant difference is the tonearm which does not have the large C shaped weight at the front end. Mine has a number of differences that allow the wooden piece to be placed above the metal rails of the arm. Instead of the large C weight, mine has two chunks of heavy metal (presumably lead) mounted between the two metal rails of the arm. Like the model 100, this model 60 has the horn in the lid which leads to lots of fancy plumbing and joints inside the record compartment required to allow the lid to raise and lower while the soundbox remains stationary and mounted to the motorboard. The horn is always connected to the soundbox, so it can be played with the lid open or closed. A bit of a plumbers nightmare. But interesting. The sound of these machines could best be described as mellow. The wood arm is not really comparable to a conventional tonearm but is actually analogous to the stylus bar of a conventional acoustic reproducer as it couples the stylus tip to the diaphragm. The ENTIRE long piece of wood vibrates just as the stylus bar on a more conventional reproducer. The proper tonearm of the Vitaphone is actually comprised of the two metal rails that run along side of the wood bar. The idea was very bizarre. But the upshot of it is that the wooden arm functions as a lowpass filter. The sound produced is soft and unusually smooth in response with a diminished treble (the anti-scratch feature touted in the advertizements) - quite unusual for an acoustic phono. Although they play rather softly, I would not recommend using loud needles with these Vitaphones. The compliance of the wood arm is nearly nonexistent - all the compliance, such as it is, is produced by the flexing of the needle itself. To mount a loud needle would be akin to mounting it in a rock on a stick and expecting that setup not to tear the bejeezus out of your records. And, yes, it is capable of playing vertical modulation about as well as lateral. This is because the connection from the wood arm to the soundbox diaphragm is accomplished with a string that is oriented at approximately a 45 degree angle to the center of the diaphragm. This arrangement causes either vertical or lateral motion of the wood arm to be transmitted (rather poorly) to the diaphragm. So it's an interesting machine to own and demonstrate, but I don't recommend using it often as it's a record grinder. I can't remember if Phono-L has a photo hosting page. I can furnish photos of the model 60 if someone can advise where to post them. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Keith Wright khwri...@hotmail.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 9:52 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Vitaphone Tone Arm I have updated the Vitaphone page with a brochure and some machine images. BTW: if you can contribute any images before you part with the tone arm, I would be grateful. Thanks, Keith Presumably not many. I have recently bumped into a collector who has a couple of them and will be putting more pictures up on that CAPP Vitaphone page shortly. (So many machines, so little time...) Cheers, Keith Wright Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2010 23:23:08 + From: bruce78...@comcast.net To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Vitaphone Tone Arm Good Luck with your sale Bob, I went to the link and that is really fascinating alternate sound technology for its time. Wonder how many of the actual units still survive. Bruce - Original Message - From: Bob rvu...@comcast.net To: Phono L List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2010 10:15:31 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: [Phono-L] Vitaphone Tone Arm I am in the process of downsizing and am selling off miscellaneous phonograph items. I have a complete tone arm and diaphragm for a Vitaphone phonograph. I know this design was manufactured and sold in Canada from 1913 to 1916. It is unusual in that the tone arm did not contain the diaphragm. It was mounted in a stand at the rear of the arm. The arm is made of wood and it vibrated. The vibrations were transferred to the diaphragm which is mounted at the rear of the arm. My arm is similar to those shown at http://www.keithwright.ca/CAPP/Vitaphone/vitaphone.html According to this web sight the tone arm was capable of playing both lateral and vertical cut records. I can supply pictures of my parts to anyone that is seriously interested in it. I don't have an idea of the value of this piece so I will sell it to the highest offer I receive. If you are interested, email me at rvu...@comcast.net and I will provide detailed pictures of my part. _ Hotmail Messenger. Get them on your phone now. http
[Phono-L] O/T: Capehart 414N-1
I realize that electronic phonos are a bit off-topic for this forum, but for those of you who can really appreciate a fine Capehart, here's a rare find: A 414N-1 with the VERY hard to find 41E-2 flipover changer: eBay Item #150426006960 This is the last version of the 41E changer that has the interchangeable tonearms and plays both 78 and 33rpm microgroove records, circa 1949. I'm posting this here to try to rescue this unit from the grimy clutches of the Western Weenies who are going to buy this console ONLY to rip out the Western Electric speaker from it so that they can mount it under glass and drool over it. Note that there is already a bidder question posted about wanting to see the speaker. Then they'll sell off the N-1 power amp with the 2A3 output triodes to some golden ear tube yahoos. Then they'll simply junk the rest of the console or turn it into a liquor cabinet. That would be a particular shame since this is appears to be a really nice and complete original example of a fine, RARE Capehart. Trust me: the 41E-2 machines are RARE! Let's see one of our Phono-L members give this complete unit the home it deserves. This model is particularly easy to enjoy while you're not playing records as it has t he modern FM radio band which means you can actually listen to good radio programs on it. In glorious monophonic sound, of course. I don't have a problem with collectors mounting things under glass to admire, but to destroy a perfectly good, working piece of fine equipment just to preserve one part of it really grinds my gears. I'd bid on it, but I don't have room for it. Greg Bogantz ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] O/T: Capehart 414N-1
Abe, the Capehart radio/phonos made from the mid 1930s to about 1950 were among the very finest, most exclusive models available in the USA. With very few exceptions such as the D-22 and the QU-8 which actually used a Capehart 16E changer and the postwar Berkshire series, ALL of which are very rare, RCA had nothing to compare. Aside from a very few other specialty makers such as E.H. Scott and McMurdo Silver, there were were no radio/phonos available in the USA that compared with the Capeharts. That's why these Capeharts are held in such high regard by collectors today. There were two common series made during these years, the 100 and the 400 series (model number were in these ranges). The 100 series was the cheaper one with smaller amplifiers and less elaborate cabinetry. The 400 series looked similar to the 100 series, but they usually (not always) had more and/or larger amplifiers and more expensive speakers and more elaborate cabinets. There was also a much rarer 300 series which were tall-boy cabinets with the components stacked vertically, and the EXTREMELY RARE 500 series which were the SUPER deluxe models available usually by special, customized order only. All these series used the exclusive Capehart flipover record changers. The early (prewar) record changers were the 16E models (several variations), and the postwar changers were the 41E models which are easily identifiable by their chromed, tubular tonearms. All these changers played only 78rpm until the 41E-2 model which came out about late 1948. This model had interchangeable TONEARMS (not just headshells) that provided for either 78rpm or for microgroove 33rpm playback. The 41E-2 was made for only a short time (probably less than 2 years) before Capehart discontinued the flipover changers completely and went to cheaper drop-type changers, most of which were furnished by VM (Voice of Music). These later Capeharts (starting around 1950) used a different numbering system and were cheapened considerably from the early 100 and 400 series. These later Capeharts are not very collectible and do not bring high prices from collectors. The B-1002-F model that you have mentioned in Arizona is an example of one of these later, post 1950 models. It would probably bring around $200 in nice condition. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Abe Feder abefed...@gmail.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 7:27 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] O/T: Capehart 414N-1 Greg, I have noted that you and several members like the Capehart units . I have seen a few of them here in Arizona from time to time.-I know nothing about them. There is one for sale now on Craigslist a model # B-1002-F. Owner says that it has been in his family for 60 years. He has original instruction manual as well as bill of sale and is asking $750.00. Any comments about it or price? Thx Abe Feder On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Greg Bogantz gbogan...@charter.net wrote: I realize that electronic phonos are a bit off-topic for this forum, but for those of you who can really appreciate a fine Capehart, here's a rare find: A 414N-1 with the VERY hard to find 41E-2 flipover changer: eBay Item #150426006960 This is the last version of the 41E changer that has the interchangeable tonearms and plays both 78 and 33rpm microgroove records, circa 1949. I'm posting this here to try to rescue this unit from the grimy clutches of the Western Weenies who are going to buy this console ONLY to rip out the Western Electric speaker from it so that they can mount it under glass and drool over it. Note that there is already a bidder question posted about wanting to see the speaker. Then they'll sell off the N-1 power amp with the 2A3 output triodes to some golden ear tube yahoos. Then they'll simply junk the rest of the console or turn it into a liquor cabinet. That would be a particular shame since this is appears to be a really nice and complete original example of a fine, RARE Capehart. Trust me: the 41E-2 machines are RARE! Let's see one of our Phono-L members give this complete unit the home it deserves. This model is particularly easy to enjoy while you're not playing records as it has t he modern FM radio band which means you can actually listen to good radio programs on it. In glorious monophonic sound, of course. I don't have a problem with collectors mounting things under glass to admire, but to destroy a perfectly good, working piece of fine equipment just to preserve one part of it really grinds my gears. I'd bid on it, but I don't have room for it. Greg Bogantz ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] Orthophonic Reproducer Gaskets question...
The Victor orthophonic reproducer (or #5 as it is sometimes known) was designed to have all the diaphragm flexure accommodated by the pleats stamped into the metal diaphragm. Unlike earlier designs, the gaskets were not intended to provide flexure - they were strictly there to seal the air leaks where the diaphragm joins the body of the reproducer. This design was purposely done to make the flexure and, therefore, the mechanical resonance more consistent from one unit to another and to ensure that it remains constant over time. This provided a much more consistent and predictable performance from one production unit to another. It was known to the designers of this reproducer that the earlier designs employing rubber gaskets deteriorated over time which resulted in decreased performance. The correct replacement gaskets for the #5 would be those that seal well without providing any flexure. If you do use rubber gaskets, the flexure that they provide will lower the diaphragm resonance frequency. This will emphasize the bass frequencies, but at the expense of the treble. The resulting sound will be more bass-heavy and with less treble and brilliance. The amount of this change in frequency response will be dependent on the softness of the gasket rubber and on the amount of clamping force you have when they are in place. In other words, the difference will be somewhat unpredictable and will vary from one implementation to another and with how the clamping force has been adjusted. This is exactly what one has to deal with when rebuilding the earlier designs such as Edisons and the early Victors that require flexure in their gaskets, and good restorers are aware of this. Some owners may prefer this more bass-heavy sound in the #5, but it will not be representing the intended frequency response of the original design of the reproducer. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: john robles john9...@pacbell.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 1:26 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Orthophonic Reproducer Gaskets question... My gaskets don't appear to have anything to do with flexibility since they are so thin. I can't imagine how they do any more then keep the metal backing from touching the diaphragm directly. John Robles --- On Mon, 3/22/10, Ron L'Herault lhera...@bu.edu wrote: From: Ron L'Herault lhera...@bu.edu Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Orthophonic Reproducer Gaskets question... To: 'Antique Phonograph List' phono-l@oldcrank.org Date: Monday, March 22, 2010, 9:15 AM In theory, they only make an air seal, rather than playing a part in compliance/flexibility, right? Ron L -Original Message- From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] On Behalf Of Steven Medved Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 11:34 AM To: Phono-l Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Orthophonic Reproducer Gaskets question... Hello Al, The original looks like paper coated with shellac to me. I have spoken to people who rebuild them and they tell me you get better sound from neoprene. I would assume Ron Sitko is selling them. Steve From: clockworkh...@aol.com Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 05:26:27 -0400 To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Orthophonic Reproducer Gaskets question... Does anyone on this learned list know what material was used as gaskets on the Victor Orthophonic reproducer? I have been asked to make a punch and die to cut them out but if someone is already making them I don't intend on reinventing the wheel. Thanks and best wishes to all on the list, Al ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] Coin machine or jukebox needles?
Hi Chris, Yes, that's right. There was no shaping of the end of the wire on Victor Tungstones. I just confirmed that by looking at a couple of NOS Tungstones that I have. The wire was sheared to essentially a flat end shape. Victor advised playing a junk record first to shape the end of the wire before using a new needle to play good records. Likewise, Victor advised reshaping the needle by playing a junk record if the user ever removed the needle and then remounted it in the reproducer. The wire wears into the shape of the groove in just a minute or so of play, so the initial shape of it is irrelevant. I failed to comment earlier specifically on the claim that osmium and other hard needles could be removed and remounted without a problem. This is NOT correct, for the same reason that Victor advised reshaping their tungsten needles if they were remounted. The needle tip wears into the V shape of the groove fairly quickly, depending on the hardness of the needle. Remounting the needle with exactly the same orientation as when it was removed is almost impossible. After remounting, there is a very high probability that the misoriented needle will severely gouge the record for a while until it is reformed to fit the groove, the moreso with the harder needles. This is not so much of a problem with the tungsten wire needles as they can be reformed in only about a minute of play with a junk record. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Chris Kocsis chris...@cox.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 10:23 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Coin machine or jukebox needles? Thank you, Greg! Are you saying that tungsten wire shaped needles are just clipped lengths of tungsten wire, without a point being formed on them before being used to play a record? Chris Greg Bogantz wrote: Osmium tipped needles were a transitional style. They were the cheapest permanent needle typically marketed in the late 1930s thru the '50s. The more expensive varieties of permanent needles were sapphire or ruby and the most expensive were diamond. People were using record changers and didn't want to mess around with changing steel needles all the time, so these styles became popular. The problem with all of these needles in that time period is that the pickups tracked at too high a force for any of them to be optimal with regard to record wear. The magnetic and crystal pickups of that period typically tracked at between 30 and 80 grams. Although that's less than the 80 to 150 grams of the earlier acoustic reproducer period, it's still just too high for any of these hard needles. They were especially deadly when used with the early vinyl 78s that were beginning to appear after WWII. The proper technology for high tracking forces was the steel or tungsten wire needle when used with shellac records that contained abrasive fillers that were intended to quickly wear the needle into conformance with the groove shape. But, of course, the steel needles needed to be changed with every record side or two. Tungsten WIRE shaped needles are superior to the osmium tipped needles because the cylindrical wire shape retains the same cross-sectional area during the entire lifetime of the needle. The osmium needles were tapered and as they wore they got a bigger cross section. This is fine until the cross section gets too big to fit into the groove width which happens after just a few records are played. Then the needle forms shoulders that ride outside the groove and on the land of the record. This lifts the needle out of close contact with the groove walls which leads to mistracking, distortion, and high record wear. These hard needles, especially the sapphire and diamond ones don't wear down quickly, and instead wear the records. These needles that were typical in this time period are the main reason that records that have survived from the '30s thru the '50s look worn and sound more distorted and worn than records that have survived from the teens and '20s and that were played properly with steel or tungsten wire needles. The use of these hard needles only became proper when pickup tracking forces were reduced to 10 grams or less in the 1950s. I don't feel comfortable using them even above about 5 grams. Tracking forces of 1 to 2 grams became commonplace in the early 1960s, and jewel-tipped needles are perfectly satisfactory when used in these pickups. The bottom line is, I would NOT recommend using hard needles in any pickup tracking at more than 10 grams if you want to preserve your records. When new, these needles will sound good for a while. But they will be grinding the bejeezus out of your records if you are tracking them at 30 grams or more. If you have a jukebox or record changer that operates at high tracking force, use tungsten wire needles. Or change the pickup (and tonearm
Re: [Phono-L] Coin machine or jukebox needles?
Osmium tipped needles were a transitional style. They were the cheapest permanent needle typically marketed in the late 1930s thru the '50s. The more expensive varieties of permanent needles were sapphire or ruby and the most expensive were diamond. People were using record changers and didn't want to mess around with changing steel needles all the time, so these styles became popular. The problem with all of these needles in that time period is that the pickups tracked at too high a force for any of them to be optimal with regard to record wear. The magnetic and crystal pickups of that period typically tracked at between 30 and 80 grams. Although that's less than the 80 to 150 grams of the earlier acoustic reproducer period, it's still just too high for any of these hard needles. They were especially deadly when used with the early vinyl 78s that were beginning to appear after WWII. The proper technology for high tracking forces was the steel or tungsten wire needle when used with shellac records that contained abrasive fillers that were intended to quickly wear the needle into conformance with the groove shape. But, of course, the steel needles needed to be changed with every record side or two. Tungsten WIRE shaped needles are superior to the osmium tipped needles because the cylindrical wire shape retains the same cross-sectional area during the entire lifetime of the needle. The osmium needles were tapered and as they wore they got a bigger cross section. This is fine until the cross section gets too big to fit into the groove width which happens after just a few records are played. Then the needle forms shoulders that ride outside the groove and on the land of the record. This lifts the needle out of close contact with the groove walls which leads to mistracking, distortion, and high record wear. These hard needles, especially the sapphire and diamond ones don't wear down quickly, and instead wear the records. These needles that were typical in this time period are the main reason that records that have survived from the '30s thru the '50s look worn and sound more distorted and worn than records that have survived from the teens and '20s and that were played properly with steel or tungsten wire needles. The use of these hard needles only became proper when pickup tracking forces were reduced to 10 grams or less in the 1950s. I don't feel comfortable using them even above about 5 grams. Tracking forces of 1 to 2 grams became commonplace in the early 1960s, and jewel-tipped needles are perfectly satisfactory when used in these pickups. The bottom line is, I would NOT recommend using hard needles in any pickup tracking at more than 10 grams if you want to preserve your records. When new, these needles will sound good for a while. But they will be grinding the bejeezus out of your records if you are tracking them at 30 grams or more. If you have a jukebox or record changer that operates at high tracking force, use tungsten wire needles. Or change the pickup (and tonearm if necessary) to allow tracking forces below 10 grams if you want to use jewel-tipped needles. Osmium would also work in this application, but it will wear out after 20 sides or so, even at this tracking force. Osmium is just a bad idea for just about any application. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Chris Kocsis chris...@cox.net To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 8:47 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Coin machine or jukebox needles? Can anyone give me the lowdown on jukebox needles? I bought some new old stock Cole's coin machine needles with osmium tips. The package says the needle lasts many plays and doesn't have to be rotated. I'm also curious about the shape of the needle. A couple of millimeters up from the point, the metal is flattened into a pointed oval like a cobra head and then resumes being cylindrical. What is that for? Osmium is nearly as hard as tungsten and I've seen some references to people cutting their own needles from tungsten wire and forming the point by rubbing the cut end in a record groove while rotating it (which seems astonishing). Is such hardness a good idea in a needle, or does it cause excessive record wear? If these jukebox needles are safe to use, how do I tell when it's time to change one? Best regards, Chris ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] Vehicle?
The elephant in the room that NOBODY ever talks about with these hybrid cars is the cost to replace the battery pack. Anybody who has ever owned a rechargeable anything knows that the battery is only good for about 3 years, advertising claims to the contrary. The published cost of the battery pack for the Toyota Prius is about $3,000. Anyone who has any thought of buying a used Prius had better be prepared to shuck out another 3 grand very quickly to actually keep the thing on the road. And the estimated battery cost of the new Chebby Volt is about 8 GRAND! No wonder the car is set to retail for 40 grand. Until there is an economical way to lease or trade in these battery packs, the whole economical, money saving baloney about operating one of these cars is just a pipe dream. It makes good advertising malarkey, but owners of these cars are in for a rude awakening sooner rather than later. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: john robles john9...@pacbell.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 2:02 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Vehicle? Are there charging stations for these types of cars? I don't know how long they take to charge, but I would imagine at some point there will need to be places where they can be charged publicly. 100 miles is not a lot of ground to cover when you are scouring the countryside for phonographs! John --- On Mon, 3/8/10, DanKj ediso...@verizon.net wrote: From: DanKj ediso...@verizon.net Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Vehicle? To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Date: Monday, March 8, 2010, 10:57 AM They say 100 miles under ideal conditions. That's more than I drive each week, so such a car would suit me - except that I have no driveway so no place to plug it in ! The 'LEAF doesn't look Victrola-sized, either - Original Message - From: john robles john9...@pacbell.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 1:24 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Vehicle? I just saw a commercial last night for Nissan's new all-electric vehicle. I wonder how far you get on a charge.. John Robles ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] Electrically Cut Edison DD's
The popular series of DDs above record number 52088 are electrically recorded. This is why the 52000 series is so much in demand and commands much higher prices than the earlier record numbers. Electrical recording was also done on some of the other series, starting with numbers 57025, 59305, 60063, 80885, and 82351. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: harvey kravitz harveykrav...@yahoo.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 7:04 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Electrically Cut Edison DD's Hi fellow collectors, Does anyone know what series numbers Edison used for his electrically cut DD's? A good friend of mine bought an Edisonic Schubert in Portland last week. If anyone has any electrically cut DD's for sale, let me know, and I will pass it on to him. Harvey Kravitz ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] Tungsten needle questions
Hi Mark, I make my own tungsten needles. Your observations are pretty much the same as my own. The original Victor Tungstones were made from wire that measures about 0.0065 inch or 6.5 mils in diameter. Today, that wire size is marketed as 7 mil. Yes, I've made needles with this size wire and they work OK when used with acoustic reproducers tracking at around 140 grams such as the Victor orthophonic (#5) and the Columbia VivaTonal #15. Even though the wire is really too large to accurately fit inside the groove, the extra width that forms shoulders on the edges of the wire gets ground down reliably due to the heavy tracking force. But when used in lighter force reproducers such as the Victor Exhibition or #2, the tracking force is sufficiently lower (80 to 100 grams) that the needles tend to rattle and distort because the shoulders of the wire are not being ground off reliably. So, I tend to prefer the 6 mil wire (actually about 5.5 mil) as it fits the groove better and can be used with these lighter tracking force applications. But you are correct in noting that the 6 mil is noticeably more inclined to bending than the 7 mil. I'm sure that Victor used the 7 mil wire because of this very need for robustness. I've also tried 5 mil diameter (actually around 4.5 mil), but that is just too flimsy to be useable in anything tracking at more than about 40 grams or so. I don't know if the annealing process is the same as that used in the original Tungstones. But I've obtained tungsten wire from several sources, including SmallParts, and it all behaves about the same way. So I'm guessing that annealed wire is probably the only kind that is sold. As I commented on the Talking Machine Forum recently, HOW you cut the wire has a LOT to do with how long it lasts as a needle. As the tungsten is hammered and drawn into the fine wire shape, it's structure becomes that of elongated crystalline threads. If you cut the wire by nipping with conventional wire nippers (diagonal cutters), you smash the crystal threads at the cut which significantly reduces their strength. The proper way to cut tungsten wire would be to grind it, then snap it. That is very hard to do with wire this fine, but you can probably use a Dremel tool with a cutoff grinding disc. The next best method is to SHEAR the wire. This does not smash the crystal threads nearly as much as nipping the wire. If you have experienced variable playback longevity with your needles, this may be the reason: the wires with the frayed crystals will break and fray quickly which reduces the needle life. The problem with shearing this wire is that you really need a shear made with VERY hard blades as you are cutting tungsten which is the hardest metallic element. Using a shear with tungsten carbide blades would be the most practical solution. Using an ordinary pair of shears with hardened steel blades works, but the blades will be nicked and banged up pretty quickly. That's what I've been doing, but I'm aware that I'm abusing my shears. Oh well, it's all for a good cause. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: mark french mf101...@msn.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2010 7:58 AM Subject: [Phono-L] Tungsten needle questions I was looking at a thread from last year that included talking about some collectors making their own tungsten needles (Victor vs. Columbia big guns). I've been making my own needles too for use in my Victrola 10-50, the big acoustic machine with the auto changer. I wanted to bounce off what I'm using to everybody and see if I am ok with what I'm using... maybe not ideal, but at the least, ok. I'm using .006 wire from SmallParts.com, it comes in straight 5-foot long pieces. However, in the specs on the website, it says 'Temper - Annealed'. There was a mention about annealed wire being too weak for use as needle tips. I have been using my needles for many months now, and as long as I make sure I don't go overboard with the length of the tungsten tip, I am not having significant problems with the wire tips being too weak. Since they have thinner wire than the factory Tonofone needles I have, which I measured at .007, I make sure that my .006 tips are somewhat shorter than those. There is also the factor that since I can make as many of these as I want for only about 2 cents each, I can afford to make the tips as short as I want. I mean I don't need them to last 50-100 records like a Tungstone - just enough to be able to play 2 or 3 or 4 12-record stacks. Anyway - comments/suggestions? Would annealed vs. not really make a significant difference in strength in this application? Smallparts was the only place I could find to buy a small amount of this size wire. I compromised with .006 wire, since .007 is too big and .005 was the next size available and it just won't take the weight. Thanks! Mark French
Re: [Phono-L] Cleaning a phonograph. Wax removing.
I wish people would stop recommending WD-40 as an all-purpose lubricant. It is particularly UNSUITABLE for lubricating fine mechanisms with small parts. It was originally designed as a waterproofing agent, hence, it's name WD-40 refers to the fact that it is a water displacement product, this being the 40th attempt. It was invented in 1953, before which time plenty of other products were found quite suitable for lubrication purposes. The long-term ingredient is a VISCOUS oil that is carried by a light, highly volatile mineral oil carrier, similar to kerosene. The kerosene acts as a penetrating agent which serves to carry the heavy oil into cracks and crevices, the better to waterproof the treated object. So, yes, the kerosene performs as a penetrating oil for about 5 minutes. Then the kerosene evaporates, and you're left with the sticky oil worked into the cracks and crannies. See the description and ingredients here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WD-40 This description has fit my experience exactly. After the carrier evaporates, you've got a sticky, tacky mess left on the object you're trying to lubricate. Bad choice for small gears and pinions. I find that WD-40 is useful primarily for exactly what it was originally intended - waterproofing. And it functions as a lubricant for heavier mechanisms, although a proper oil or grease is far preferable. If you want a penetrating oil, use pure kerosene. I use an automotive product that consists of a very light volatile carrier with suspended tiny graphite particles called Part-Ease. It's particularly good for stuck rusty parts. Don't know if that brand is still available - the can I'm using is one I bought 30 years ago. Works good on exhaust manifold bolts on cars and motorcycles. If you want a proper lubricant for fine mechanisms like clocks and similar low-torque mechanisms, use a proper very light oil such as can be purchased from clock repair parts suppliers. Proper light clock oil does not dry up or get tacky. And it's available in various viscosities for light, medium, and moderately heavy torque applications. For most phonograph mechanisms, I find that ordinary 20 or 30 weight automotive motor oil works quite well. For sliding surfaces such as the reproducer bearing bar surfaces on many Edison cylinder machines, I use a mixture of 30 weight oil and a PTFE (teflon) product such as Slick 50. The PTFE provides long lasting surface penetration into the metal for superior reduction of sliding friction and stiction. Actually, I like this oil-PTFE mixture so well that I now use if for all my medium-duty lubrication needs. For very heavy torque applications such as the main bull gears of phonographs, an ordinary automotive grease is appropriate. I use a molybdenum-disulfide based grease (molly dum-dum for you motorcycle wrenches out there) for most applications. It doesn't dry out, channel, and get stiff like many lithium based greases. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Curt Angstman vinyl.visi...@live.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2010 8:36 AM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Cleaning a phonograph. Wax removing. Hi Gabriel, For basic motor cleaning, remove the motor from the machine and find a container large enough to fit it in. Fill the container with kerosene and let it soak for several days. Use a toothbrush to remove sludge from gears and small parts. Kerosene will not harm your motor and will actually lubricate it. When you are through, you need to re-grease the spring, if possible. Grease will continue to leak from the motor for awhile, since the kerosene dissolves it, so you will want to put a rag under it after it is re-installed. I also use WD 40 and spray lithium grease to re-lube the motor. WD 40 also will remove crud from the wood cabinet or painted surfaces without harming the finish - I use it on my BMW to remove tar, etc. It's a great product and has many uses, like removing sticker glue, tar and grease. It is also wonderful for re-energizing the paint on a horn. On black horns, I touch up scratches with a Sharpie marker and/or liquid gun bluing (gun bluing works great to age metal parts) and then clean the horn with WD 40. On painted or flowered horns, it cleans and deepens the colors. Neither kerosene or WD 40 will harm painted or nickel finished parts. WD 40 also restores and cleans 78 records and Amberol cylinders. Some people will disagree with that, but take a dirty, scratchy 78 record and try it - it will improve the sound and make it look better - and absolutely NO damage to the record - spray it on and wipe it off. I have used this method for over 30 years and have never had any damage to my records. It will not dissolve 78 rpm records or celluloid, but DO NOT use it on wax cylinders!!! I can't help with the parts, but what do you mean by click-fitting system. Are you talking about the latches
[Phono-L] Allen Hough
As some of you may know, Allen Hough made a peculiar record changer that was used on only a few radio/phonos in the late 1920s, the Columbia 990 and the Zenith 75 being the only two that I know about. Here's a strange electric portable acoustic machine made by them: http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Allen-Hough-Turntable-Record-Player-Phonograph_W0QQitemZ320475016810QQcmdZViewItemQQptZVintage_Electronics_R2?hash=item4a9dccae6a Note the busted casting which reveals what appears to be a multi-pole induction motor rotor. Note the escutcheon around the spindle hole in the platter says Allen Hough Rotor Corp. in Milwaukee. Wonder what a rotor corporation was? Maybe they specialized in gear hobbing or making multi-pole induction motors. Anybody know more about this company? Greg Bogantz ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] Allen Hough
Thanks for that link, Allen. That is, indeed, the Allen Hough record changer that was used in the Columbia VivaTonal 990 and Zenith model 75. I had not known about this Carryola jukebox before. The Columbia and Zenith models are quite rare - the Carryola juke must be even more so. Several bidders must have thought it pretty special to jack the sale price up so high. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: allena...@aol.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 7:17 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Allen Hough In a message dated 1/19/2010 5:31:40 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, gbogan...@charter.net writes: http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Allen-Hough-Turntable-Record-Player-Phonograph_W 0QQitemZ320475016810QQcmdZViewItemQQptZVintage_Electronics_R2?hash=item4a9dc cae6a - See this for comparison: _RARE CARRYOLA CABARET COUNTERTOP COIN OP JUKE BOX for sale_ (http://www.hydroponicsonline.com/store/RARE-CARRYOLA-CABARET-COUNTERTOP-COIN-OP-JUKE-BOX_ 200394548733.html) Allen _www.phonobooks.com_ (http://www.phonobooks.com) ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] Columbia Grafonola Electiric motor shutoff question
I'm not familiar with this type of Columbia electric motor, but it sounds like it may be a variant that includes the Columbia non-set auto-stop mechanism that was used on the more expensive spring motor models. I have a Columbia electric motor model, but the switch mechanism is simple and is merely coupled to the tonearm by a lever. Some of our readers have probably worked on the non-set auto-stop spring motors and can perhaps help you to figure out how it works. It's a clever design and somewhat complicated. I don't know if there is any documentation available on how to service these, but it would be a valuable addition to the phono literature. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Daniel Melvin d...@old-phonographs.com To: Phono-L@oldcrank.org phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Monday, December 21, 2009 11:47 AM Subject: [Phono-L] Columbia Grafonola Electiric motor shutoff question Does anyone have any information on the rather complicated geared switch mechinism on an electric Columbia motor? I have a machine where that mechinism seems to have frozen up which was keeping the motor from running. I took it apart and stared at it quite a lot and cannot even figure out how it works. It has a bunch of gears and a cam that turns the motor off and on. To get the machine working I disconnected the gear attached to the tonearm and rigged a manual switch for the motor. It works great, but I would really like to restore the original switch mechinism if anyone has suggestions or information on it. I have all the original parts, but the switch lost me in the dust. And, I thought Edison made complicated machines! This switch is amazing. Thanks Dan ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] What did I buy? Ebay item 220523099867
The motor is a modern electric type - you can see the rubber idler wheel, and the platter is a modern type, probably matching the motor assembly. The cabinet looks homemade. It appears that the only collectible part on it is the ID tag. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: bruce78...@comcast.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 1:10 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] What did I buy? Ebay item 220523099867 Sorry, I came in late on this. Someone obviously attached the ID plate for an Orthophonic table model to another Victor. But which Victor did they attach it to ? and what was that crazy little turntable from ? - Original Message - From: Barry Kasindorf barry.kasind...@gmail.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 11:29:51 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [Phono-L] What did I buy? Ebay item 220523099867 I think that many Ebay sellers claim ignorance about what the phono they are selling really is when they know full well it is junk. If this was a real onsite auction or estate sale you could more closely examine a piece, get a better feel for it and make a decision. No matter how many pictures you have on Ebay you really don't have the same feeling for an item as you do in person. Saying buyer beware is simplistic in this situation. You still need some sense of honesty and cooperation from the seller if there was a misunderstanding of what the item is instead of the usual glee taken when a novice collector or even a older collector in a hurry misunderstands what is for sale and gets taken. -Barry On 12/15/2009 11:26 PM, brice paris wrote: I am a little shocked here. Not sure who is being taken, item does not seem to be misrepresented and the pictures are clear. A bidder has a responsibility to follow through on their contract win or lose. What am I missing??? From: William Buchananret.army...@yahoo.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Mon, December 14, 2009 6:20:44 PM Subject: [Phono-L] What did I buy? Ebay item 220523099867 Friends, It's a hard thing to admit that you've been taken, but the good thing is that it was not for much and I have not paid him yet. But if this is at least a real Victrola I will have no problems paying him. Can somebody tell me what I purchased? Ebay item 220523099867 They said it is a Victrola VV I-90 but it's not so what is this? Thank you Bill ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] Type of Finish on Victor VV-100
I think that is probably what was known as Flemish oak. Very, very dark, almost black with a semi-gloss finish. I have an Edison C-250 in flemish oak which is a very rare finish for a DD machine. I've seen only one other example. It's the only Edison finish that looks remotely this dark. The other possibilities shown in Baumbach's latest LFTD book might be gunmetal (perhaps a bit greenish or bluish) or driftwood, but I think those finishes were both less glossy than what's seen in this video. Or perhaps it is Early English as the owner speculates in the video. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: bruce78...@comcast.net To: MOCAPS mocap...@yahoogroups.com Cc: Phono-L Phono-L@oldcrank.org Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 9:23 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Type of Finish on Victor VV-100 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8cj7MOCdpk I am looking to try an pin down what type of Victor Finish this might be, but it is hard to determine from the small samples that are shown in Victor Data Book. Anyone care to offer an opinion. Thanks, Bruce ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
Re: [Phono-L] Capehart
Walt, the tracking force used in the early Capehart 16-E changer which used the fan head black pickup was very nearly the same as that of the other early horseshoe-magnet magnetic pickups. They track at 120 - 150 grams or so, making the tungsten wire needles the only good choice for multiple-play use. That would include the changers thru about the E or F-line Capeharts (ca. 1938 and earlier). The G-line series was about when the later, smaller brown pickup heads came into use on the Capeharts. The early versions of these were also magnetic and tracked at around 100 grams or so. The later versions of the 16-E changer with the similar-looking brown pickup head were fitted with the early Astatic crystal cartridges which tracked at 40 - 50 grams. Still, this is too high a force to use with a hard jewel-point needle, even though this was common practice at the time. As you say and as I say in my other post on this subject, jewel-point needles were really never the correct choice for these cartridges that tracked at anything much over 12 grams or so. You record collectors might have noticed that the records you get from the mid to late 1930s tend to be more worn, distorted, and noisy than the records from the 1920s and earlier. This is because the record players made from the mid '30s to the early postwar period often used jewelled needles in these crystal cartridges that tracked at 30 grams or more. The advertising of the day called this featherweight tracking at only one ounce! That's a pretty heavy feather. But they ground up the records mercilessly. Unfortunately, this situation continued until the advent of the GE variable reluctance (VR) magnetic cartridge that tracked at around 10 - 12 grams and which came into common use with the Capehart 41-E changer and other top-end record players after WWII. Even after the war, most cheap record players continued to use crystal cartridges tracking at 30 grams or so until microgroove vinyl records came into use after 1948. This brought the need and application of much better cartridges that could track at 8 grams or less. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Walt Sommers waltsomm...@comcast.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 4:06 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Capehart Bob, Do you know the approximate tracking mass of the Capehart pick up? I am guess it is probably 25 to 40 grams? The RCA Chromium needles would be a concern on the 10-50 or other Victor automatics that use the #5 acoustic Orthophonic reproducer (tracking at a whopping 130 grams or so) but assuming that the Capehart's pickup is something like 25 to 40 grams I can't imagine the RCA Chromium needles would be an issue. I recall reading an RCA patent (which I can't specifically call to mind right now) concerning the use of chromium on the needles which briefly discussed the issue of the relatively low mass of electrical pickups versus the higher mass of the acoustic reproducers. The Victor Soft or Full Tungs~Tone stylus would be ideal for the Capehart as well as most of the early electrical pickups. I can't say I would recommend the Extra Loud Tungs~Tone stylus simply because they are quite aggressive. Others swear by them. Whatever you choose, I would stay as far away from jeweled styli (sapphires, diamonds, etc.) as possible. Sapphires and diamonds would be great if only the designs of the early pickups were better. I have a feeling I am in Dr. Bogantz's area of expertise here...Perhaps he will jump in. Walt RBaumbach wrote: Tungstone needles are probably the best choice for either the 10-50 or the Capehart, and were recommended by both manufacturers. In the mid-thirties Capehart recommended the RCA Chromium needles, but some collectors feel that these are hard on records. Both the Tungstone and Chromium needles are still rather plentiful. There is a more comprehensive discussion of needles on the bonus page for the Capehart book (see page 5). Contact me privately regarding the owner's manual and schematics. Bob On TuesdayJuly 14, 2009, at 10:11 AM, jim...@earthlink.net wrote: After many years, my 1937 Capehart 404G (serial number 10627E) is now functioning sounds great is fun to watch as it changes records. I have noticed quite a bit of needle noise in the magnetic pickup when the volume is turned down even though the pickup has been restored. Is this endemic to a properly performing Capehart as I suspect because all the doors to the record playing compartment are sealed with rubber gaskets, presumable to contain mechanical noise or does the pickup need further work? Also, where can one obtain needles for playing large numbers of 78s without being changed in the Capehart or Orthophonic Victrola 1050? I have Mr. Baumbach's excellent book on the Capeharts without which the repairman who usually works on 1950s 1960s hifi gear would have been
[Phono-L] wire wound link cord -DD reproducers
The Edisonic reproducer was a later refinement of the Dance reproducer. You can read the patent disclosure for the Dance in US patent #1,711,265 which details the claims for the additional weight and the springs that were added. Much of this description is technological baloney, but it served to get Edison yet another patent. The claim made for wrapping the link between the stylus bar and the diaphragm was that this damped the spurious vibrations and resonances in the link. It probably did that, but it also added more moving mass to the system which served to lower the overall resonance. I have found that none of the additional dampers and springs serve any real, useful purpose. When I change the diaphragm in a Dance or Edisonic, I use one of my standard DD diaphragms with the same link and remove the additional springs. The performance is better than what you get in a standard DD reproducer because of the additional tracking force created by the bigger weight. The additional weight adds more mass to the stylus bar fulcrum so that bass performance is also improved by lowering the weight/fulcrum resonant frequency. That's all there really is to it. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Ron L'Herault lhera...@bu.edu To: 'Antique Phonograph List' phono-l@oldcrank.org; phonol...@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, April 04, 2009 8:43 PM Subject: [Phono-L] wire wound link cord -DD reproducers The Edisonic reproducers that I have seen have fine wire wound along the length of the cord linking diaphragm to needle bar. Why? Was it to make the cord stronger? Was it for some sonic reason or for another reason I have not though of? Ron L ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] Edsion 30 Echos - What To Do?
Hi Brantley, Echo when playing Edison records (DDs or cylinders) is usually a sign of a worn stylus. It could also be caused by the hinge block not moving freely. You should check your stylus under a fairly powerful microscope and look for the formation of shoulders on either side of the center of the tip. These are signs of excessive wear and you should replace the stylus. Check the hinge or pivot at the back of the reproducer that allows the weight to move sideways within the limits of the limit loop at the front. This pivot should move freely. Clean it and lubricate it if it feels sticky or tight. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: kugl...@wmconnect.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 9:17 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Edsion 30 Echos - What To Do? Hi. I just purchased an Edison 30 machine. Many of the 4 minute cylinders echo when playing. I can take these same cylinders and play them on my Edison 75 and they play perfect. There are some cylinders to do play fine on the 30 machine, but about 70% of them echo. It is really noticeable with a Cal Stewart or vocal record. Is there anything that I can do to adjust the reproducer? Any assistance with this annoying problem would be much appreciated. Thanks. Brantley ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] Opera like Phonograph?
Yes, it appears that the 1A motor will fit into the Opera or 1B or III cabinet. The 1A motor deck is about 1/2 inch longer and about 1/8 inch deeper, but the three mounting points seems to be in the proper location for either to mount in the same cabinets. I don't know about the Opera cabinet, but the console cabinets have spaces large enough around the motor deck to allow either motor to fit. And the crank locations also seem to be about the same. To exchange a 1A for an Opera, you would also have to exchange the horn connector stanchion to change from an inside to outside horn configuration. The late production of M and O reproducers were made with the trowel shaped weights. I think the factory actually re-worked some of the round weights into the trowel shape. I am working on an M now that clearly has had the weight cut down - the nickel plating is missing from the cut edges. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Albert cen...@comcast.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 5:16 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Opera like Phonograph? I am curious about the Almost Opera that just appeared on Ebay. Will an Amberola 1-a mech. fit that well in an opera case? of course the serial plate is gone, but the bedplate color is opera correct, my 1-A is much darker. Also I have never seen a model M reproducer that has been shaved like a trowel, any comments? AL Menashe ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] [Fwd: [CBI] Wet 78s and broadcast equipment - needrestoration help]
Well, assuming that the 78s weren't exposed to heat from the steam pipe break and that they have only a water soaking, there's probably nothing wrong with them except for some potential label damage. Check for obvious warpage or cracking and dispose of those records. The ones that appear undamaged otherwise should be removed from any damaged paper sleeves and rewashed as quickly as possible to remove any wet paper residue while protecting their labels from the washing. Shellac records (or vinyl or styrene 45s) are not damaged by washing in water. They should then be thoroughly rinsed with distilled water, dried, and returned to new record sleeves. The analog audio equipment is another story. About the only thing to do is to dry it out COMPLETELY, then check each piece carefully for any signs of water damage. Older equipment that does not contain circuit boards may well survive with little more than a good drying out, then maybe a brushing out of any foreign residue from the chassis. Circuit boards need to be checked for evidence of water stains that can cause short circuits. These stains can often be cleaned off with alcohol and a stiff brush. Some of the capacitors might need to be replaced, but that needs to be determined on an individual basis. Mechanical equipment such as turntables and tape decks will need to have their mechanics cleaned and relubricated. But most of this equipment is probably recoverable if there is interest in doing it. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Thatcher Graham thatc...@mediaguide.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Monday, December 22, 2008 12:58 PM Subject: [Phono-L] [Fwd: [CBI] Wet 78s and broadcast equipment - needrestoration help] A heartbreaking story of damaged 78s in Atlanta. If any of you have experience in this matter please let me know. Original Message Subject: [CBI] Wet 78s and broadcast equipment - need restoration help Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 12:21:38 -0500 From: Thomas Shanks tsha...@gatech.edu Reply-To: College Broadcasters, Inc c...@listserv.syr.edu To: c...@listserv.syr.edu From The Collegiate Broadcasters, Inc. (CBI) Listserv Our radio station's storage area was steamed in a sauna from a broken steam pipe for probably 7 days before we were informed last week. We have a full complement of high-quality used analog studio equipment (an entire disassembled old studio) and a few hundred 78s that were too wet to handle until today as the room was dried with a dehumidifier. They are still damp, so it's time to do what we need to do to save what can be saved. What should we do to save the 78s? What should we do to save the reel tape? And the audio equipment? Thank you for any help you can give, Thomas Shanks Chief Engineer WREK Georgia Tech Student Radio -- Thatcher Graham Senior Field Engineer Mediaguide 640 Freedom Business Ctr. STE 305 King of Prussia, PA 19406 ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] *** JUNK MAIL ***Bargain Victor 10-35 cabinet
I just stumbled onto this: http://cgi.ebay.com/Beautiful-wood-turntable_W0QQitemZ170285399152QQcmdZViewItemQQptZVintage_Electronics_R2?hash=item170285399152_trksid=p3286.c0.m14_trkparms=66%3A2|65%3A1|39%3A1|240%3A1318 I'm pretty sure this is a Victor 10-35 cabinet. The seller doesn't say much about it, and there isn't much time to ask questions as the sale closes in 6 hours. There may be nothing inside it, but who knows. If anybody needs what looks like a fairly nice cabinet for a 10-35, you might at least get that for a song. Greg Bogantz From lhera...@verizon.net Sun Dec 14 20:54:29 2008 From: lhera...@verizon.net (Ron L'Herault) Date: Sun Dec 14 21:55:00 2008 Subject: [Phono-L] Amberola VIII and cyl cabinet questions Message-ID: 2d412324c41e4e55a9d6e487b733c...@ronlherault I have recently acquired an Amberola VIII that I think someone modified to run on an electric motor once. The electric motor was already gone though as was most of the original spring motor. Sooo, the questions are: 1. What is the original size (OD and diameter at the belt groove bottom) of the pulley on the spring motor. 2. Is this pulley very heavy for its size. 3. Should it have a cork lining to the pulley groove? 4. There is an oblong hole in the back plate to the right of the cut out for the horn neck. I suspect the on/off electrical switch was there but I am not sure. Has anyone seen a hole like this in their VIII? And on a separate note, I've been given a cylinder cabinet, a rather simple design with flat board shelves that have grooves in them into which one glues cardboard pegs. Toilet paper and paper towel inner cardboard tubes are the right size, by the way. The hooks that keep the shelves from pulling all the way out are missing. Anyone have a source for replacement hooks. They are a rather critical component. Thanks, Ron L
[Phono-L] Player for 78 rpm records
The best deal on the best-sounding record players these days is to get one of the commercial or institutional models that used to be made for schools and churches. The best of these brands is Newcomb which has the best build quality, but similar models were made by Audiotronics, Califone, and Hamilton. These models are usually 4-speed manual players with turnover cartridges that have the 3 mil stylus for 78s and a 1 mil or .7 mil for 45s and LPs. Some of the models also have speed vernier controls. They also have considerable electronic equalization that makes them much better sounding than the common consumer players. Here's a good example of an Audiotronics: http://cgi.ebay.com/AUDIOTRONICS-338V-VARIABLE-SPEED-RECORD-PLAYER-WORKS-A_W0QQitemZ220302074193QQcmdZViewItemQQptZVintage_Electronics_R2?hash=item220302074193_trksid=p3286.c0.m14_trkparms=72%3A1205%7C66%3A2%7C65%3A12%7C39%3A1%7C240%3A1318 Here's one of the smaller Newcombs: http://cgi.ebay.com/VINTAGE-NEWCOMB-SOLID-STATE-RECORD-PLAYER-MODEL-EDT-20V_W0QQitemZ260312311494QQcmdZViewItemQQptZVintage_Electronics_R2?hash=item260312311494_trksid=p3286.c0.m14_trkparms=72%3A1234%7C66%3A2%7C65%3A12%7C39%3A1%7C240%3A1318 These players are robust, highly portable, and easy to repair. And you can often get them for $50 or less on eBay. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: buck Buchanan ret.army...@yahoo.com To: phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2008 12:16 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Player for 78 rpm records I need some help in finding a cheap record player that will play the 78 rpm records. I have an Emerson and I have also looked at the Crosley and both of them just don't cut it. They use the same needle for the 78's and for the 33's and the 78's sound awful and it not because they are dirty because I have cleaned the records. My biggest problem is that I am a disabled vet trying to live on $1,000 a month. so I don't have much to pull from in the way of money. I know my in laws want to buy me something but I can't ask them to spend hundreds of dollars on this. does anybody know of a cheap player on the market that sounds good! And where can I find it. Thanks Bill ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] Lateral Vs Vertical.
The problem with the Pathe Diffusor as well as with the Pathe Actuelle is the absence of proper baffling around the reproducer cone or diaphragm. The benefits of the fairly direct connection of the stylus to the diaphragm are unfortunately swamped by the poor bass response of both of these systems. The Actuelle also suffers from the extraordinarily long linkage from stylus to reproducer cone. This also causes a rolloff of the treble frequencies due to the high moving mass of this stylus bar connection. Putting a baffle (to keep the front sound emissions from cancelling with those from the back) around the Diffusor diaphragm or Actuelle cone would greatly enhance the bass performance, but it would make the phono quite large and ungainly. This is part of the theory of horn reproduction - the emission from one side of the diaphragm is GREATLY enhanced with respect to the emission from the other side and there is little opportunity for cancellation. And with typical cone loudspeaker reproduction, a baffle (the cabinet or box) helps keep the back emission separate from the front to reduce cancellations. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Robert Wright esrobe...@hotmail.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 6:57 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Lateral Vs Vertical. Jim, Greg, Steve, and Thomas :-), Thanks very much for all the insight. I hadn't considered the possibility that vertical was inferior, but vertical companies worked that much harder for better sound; I assumed all other things were probably even. I do find it strange that so many vertical recordings by so many companies had superior sound to so many laterals, including as pointed out below, individual labels who issued records cut both ways. Anyone have any impressions of the Path? Diffusor? I would think that being a large diaphragm with a jewel tip sitting directly on the recorded groove, it would be the most direct playback mechanism of any that have existed. Right? No pivot point to worry about, just the simplest physics around -- true analog, as it were, the only example of it since Edison's original prototype, yes? Has anyone thought to try improving upon that particular playback methodology? Thanks again, all. I'm storing these in a special folder to revisit from time to time. Best to all, Robert - Original Message - From: Thomas Edison edisonphonowo...@hotmail.com To: phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 4:10 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Lateral Vs Vertical. Hello everyone. Thinking of the L and V issue, I have a very simple response from cutting records. I had recorded Laquers with the Fairchild lathe , in order to record high frequencies, I had to boost them to a dangerous level almost burning the coil up. When you record you boost highs and limit the lows, and the opposite when you play them back. I used the same head to record hill and dale cylinder records on Edison blanks, and could record the cylinders almost flat, and the lows and highs sounded very similar to the original recording, and the highs did not have to be boosted to the dangerous levels of the lateral disc of which the head was designed to cut, so it certainly seems that it is harder to record highs on lateral recordings than vertical. Some of you on the list have some of these electrically recorded cylinders in your collections with modern music on them, you can state the same I am sure. When it comes to bass however, vertical records are much harder as li fts occur, but you can increase the ambient wax temperature and record deeper grooves, and record more bass The lowest bass note I had recorded on cylinders was 16 cps, however this was a test tone, with no other frequencies added, it was very difficult to do but can be done. Lateral records record bass with relative ease, however if the volume is to high the grooves run into eachother and must be spaced apart more. (Most modern recording lathes do this automatically.) If you listen to companies that recorded lateral and vertical records you can hear much clearer records, with vertical recordings time and time again. Pathe', Gennette ect. _ Want to read Hotmail messages in Outlook? The Wordsmiths show you how. http://windowslive.com/connect/post/wedowindowslive.spaces.live.com-Blog-cns!20EE04FBC541789!167.entry?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_hotmail_092008 ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] Vertical versus lateral records
Bob, your earlier assumption of the vertical-lateral stereo record was correct with regard to some of the early stereo proposals. But that system would not have been compatible with playback of a stereo record on an older mono lateral cartridge. This was one requirement of any stereo record system that would get the blessing of the record companies. Thus, the 45-45 system was developed that does as you say - one channel is a combination of vertical and lateral motion of one groove wall and the other channel is the same on the opposite groove wall. To be compatible with mono lateral pickup cartridges, this requires that the SUM or in-phase conponents of the two stereo channels to be represented as the lateral components of both channels which will then cause pure lateral motion of the pickup stylus and which will present the stereo recording as fully folded down into mono and be playable on a lateral pickup. The DIFFERENCE between the left and right channels is represented purely as the total vertical component of stylus motion. This signal is not pertinent when hearing the stereo program folded down to mono, and this vertical signal is not detected by a lateral pickup. You ask how it's possible to separate the two channels in one groove in this manner. The answer is that each signal generator in the pickup cartridge is responsive to only ONE axis of modulation. So if you cause modulation on the axis which is purely perpendicular or orthogonal to the sensitivity axis, there is no component of the signal along the sensitivity axis and the signal generator does not respond to that modulation. By placing two such signal generators in the stereo pickup cartridge, each responsive to the 45 degree angle from the vertical as represented by one groove wall, note that one groove wall is 90 degrees differently inclined from the other - in other words, the groove is cut with a 90 degree angle between the sidewalls. Unlike the case with pure vertical or lateral cut mono records, this 90 degree angle of the groove is a REQUIREMENT of the 45-45 stereo groove. This allows the wiggles from one groove wall to move the stylus in a completely orthogonal motion relative to the modulation from the other groove wall. Thus, each signal generator is responsive ONLY to the modulation from the groove wall which causes stylus motion along its sensitivity axis, and that generator does not respond to stylus motion caused by the other groove wall whose axis of stylus motion is orthogonal to its sensitivity axis. This allows the two channels to exist in one groove, and the crosstalk between channels is theoretically zero. In practice, real world stereo pickup cartridges do not achieve perfect separation but they do a pretty good job, typically achieving from 20 to 40 dB of separation between channels over the entire audio frequency range. Separation above about 20dB when auditioned via loudspeakers is essentially indistinguishable from perfect separation by listeners. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Bob rvu...@comcast.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 2:47 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Vertical versus lateral records Hi Greg, This is all very informative. I always assumed that in a stereo recording, one channel responded to the vertical motion of the stylus and the other to the lateral motion. If I understand you correctly, this is not correct. One channel responds to both by both the lateral and vertical movement on one side of the groove and the other channel to the lateral and vertical movement of the other side of the groove. What I don't understand is how this is possible. It would seem that the motion in either direction on one side would affect the motion of the other side because the stylus can't be in two lateral or vertical positions at the same time. I hope you understand what I mean and can provide an explanation as to how this works. Thanks Robert Vuillemenot - Original Message - From: Greg Bogantz gbogantz1 at charter.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 9:00 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Vertical versus lateral records Well, Robert, with some trepidation do I want to open this can of worms again. I was involved in some knock-down-drag-out arguments on two other phonograph forums over this topic in the past. It seems there are some die-hards in both the Edison and Victor camps who want to retain their predjudices regardless of knowing the facts. But in the interest of showing some scientific light on this question, I'll try to cite the most important aspects of the physics governing the analog recording and reproduction process. First of all, you should dismiss nearly everything that Read and Welch say in their book From Tinfoil to Stereo. The authors have a very Edison
[Phono-L] Research: Amberolas 1A and 1B (Greg Bogantz)
Jim, I just talked with my friend who designed the Ediphonic and he said I could post some pictures of the horn and the complete machine. I'll try to get that done here shortly. I think I convinced him to join Phono-L, so you might see him contributing to our discussions here later. Regarding the use of a round link fastener on my diaphragms: I've tried several ways to make these, but the issue always comes down to keeping the moving mass as low as possible. The little piece of wire that I use is the simplest means of attaching the link and it sounds no different from the disc-shaped means that I tried. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: jim...@earthlink.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 3:33 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Research: Amberolas 1A and 1B (Greg Bogantz) Dear Mr. Bogantz: Your friend's experimental exponential Amberola horn sounds fascinating - wish I could hear it. I tried playing diamond discs through one of my Orthophonic Credenzas using the Bruswick Ultona arm and soundbox this was quite an improvement over the diamond disc machines - am sure it would have been much better if it had been possible to use an Edison reproducer. Obviously the great weakness of Edison phonographs (aside from vertical cut recording), both cylinder disc, is that they, unlike their lateral-cut competitors' acoustic machines, did not employ tone arms that by their very existance elogated the narrower portion of the tone passage, more closely approximating exponetial shape. One would have thought that mathmatician Theodore Edison would have exponentially elongated the narrow portion of the horn in the Edisonic. Wish your friend would market an aftermarket exponetial horn for both Amberola Diamond Disc phonographs.Let me know if he does. I bought one of your diamond disc diaphragms several years ago thought it might be improved by having the link attached to the diaphragm by a round something against the diaphragm rather than the little straight bar.Have you by any chance incorporated this improvement? Am always interested in obtaining the best sound quality from my vintage machines. All good wishes... Very truly yours, Jim Cartwright Immortal Performances jimcip at earthlink.net EarthLink Revolves Around You. ... [Original Message] From: Greg Bogantz gbogantz1 at charter.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Date: 28-Oct-2008 5:48:38 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Research: Amberolas 1A and 1B (Greg Bogantz) Bruce, the only reason that I discount the 1A from being the best cylinder player is because of its inferior motor. The straight-cut spur gears of the 1A are decidedly noisier than the Opera motor of the 1B and the III. When I first got my 1A, it sounded like and electric drill whenever I ran it. The noise comes mostly from the high speed governor gears, and the only fix for it is to replace these gears with nearly perfect new ones. Try to find those anywhere! I got lucky and swapped a fellow collector some items for a set of nearly new gears which quieted my 1A down to the point where it is enjoyable, but still not as quiet as my 1B. The other big problem with the 1A is that it doesn't have the mechanical flutter filter and flywheel that Edison added to some of his later motors such as the Opera, Amberola V, and all the late amberolas. The lack of a sufficient flywheel coupled with the belt drive of the 1A virtually ensures that you'll get flutter and wow that is just an essential aspect of this design. Acoustically, the 1A is the same as the 1B, but the motor spoils the total experience a little. However, since the 1A motor is no worse than any found on any other 2 minute cylinder machine, the superior horn of the 1A makes it the best overall 2 minute machine in my estimation. AND it has the added benefit that you can play 2 minute celluloid records with the Diamond A reproducer which is truly the best 2 minute experience that you can get in a commercially made machine. I like my 1A just fine, but I prefer to hear 4 minute celluloids on my 1B or my III. I don't include the Opera among the very best sounding machines because I haven't heard ANY commercially made outside horns on cylinder machines that are the sonic equal to the horns in the Amberola 1s and III. I mentioned on the OTV board that I have a mechanical engineer friend who decided to make his own large genuine cygnet shaped exponential outside horn. He has fitted it to an Amberola 50 motor which he has put into a custom tabletop cabinet. The horn is suspended over the carriage by a clever, original design double crane pantographic system that works much better than any original design. He calls his machine the Ediphonic and has even put an Edison-style logo on it with that name. The reproducer is a modified
[Phono-L] Vertical versus lateral records
matched the nature of the music and the talent, that is different recorders were used for selections featuring a solo vocalist than were used for band recordings or were used for massed voices, etc. Victor and Columbia probably weren't as careful in the early days about these details of their acoustic recording setups. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Robert Wright esrobe...@hotmail.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 6:46 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Research: Amberolas 1A and 1B (Greg Bogantz) With all due respect, how is vertical cut recording inferior to lateral cut? Certainly in the phonograph's first 25 years, Edison's machines sounded substantially better than respectively contemporary lateral phonographs. I hear more treble extension on direct-recorded 4M amberols than any acoustic lateral recordings, as well as more general naturalness. I must respectfully disagree that vertical recording can be regarded as inherently inferior to lateral recording, generally speaking. I should perhaps mention that I have no allegiance to one method over the other whatsoever. Greg B., may I ask your thoughts on this? Any information about specific frequency responses, and especially, the physics involved with both the recording and playback (and duplication if you care to get that deep) processes, would be fascinating and greatly appreciated! Best to all, Robert - Original Message - From: jimcip at earthlink.net snip Obviously the great weakness of Edison phonographs (aside from vertical cut recording)... ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] Amberolas 1A and 1B horns
Steve, it's not readily possible to compare the 1A and 1B horns with any others because of the unique fittings that they employ on the machines. Even so, there was no other horn shaped like the 1A 1B horns which probably has the MOST to do with their sound. In other words, you would have to make a wood horn with the same unique shape as the 1A horn to properly compare the effects attributable to the construction materials. But I would imagine that the two materials would sound rather similar since wood is a more intrinsically damped material than metal and is similar in damping to the jute construction of the 1A horn. Also, a solid wood horn would have different damping from that of a plywood construction. But overall, I would agree that I like the metal horns the least of all the constructions because of their poor damping. This could be improved by overlaying the outside of the horn with some plaster or other material which would add mass and damp the metallic ringing. I have heard of people actually doing this with a Credenza. Even though these are wood horns which are already pretty well damped, some people believe that filling the volume between the horn and the cabinet sides with CONCRETE !!! makes them sound better. Good grief, the beast weighs enough as it is. Who needs to add another several hundred pounds of stone just to damp the wood horn a little better? Oh well, ya pays yer money and ya takes yer cherce. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Steven Medved steve_nor...@msn.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 6:27 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Amberolas 1A and 1B horns Hi Greg, Do they sound better than wood? I am very impressed by how much better wood sounds than tin, what a huge difference. I always sound test reproducers with my tin horn as all the defects are pronounced. Wood makes them sound better even when they are not. Steve Steve, the 1A and 1B horns are very odd. They're made of a fibrous material, molded or layed up against a form. Different from anything else that Edison ever did. Someone on one of these phono boards had the answer in a previous posting, but I can't remember the details. Hopefully they will respond with a clear description. Anyway, the horns are well damped due to this construction technique and don't exhibit the ringing and resonances that are common with metal horns, which is one of the reasons they sound so good. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Steven Medved steve_noreen at msn.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 1:35 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Research: Amberolas 1A and 1BThanks so much, what was the 1A horn made of? Steve From: gbogantz1 at charter.net To: phono-l at oldcrank.org Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 22:40:02 -0400 Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Resea rch: Amberolas 1A and 1B I have all three machines, the Amberola 1A, 1B, and III. The III isvery close to the 1B in sound, but I think it's a little more midrangey due to the metal horn. But it does sound very good, and it's my second favorite 4-minute cylinder player on the basis of sound quality, the 1B being the best commercially produced 4-minute cylinder machine ever made in my opinion. George Paul and I are having this discussion currently over on the OTV board, and we both agree also that the 1A is the best sounding commercially available 2 minute machine. The horns used in all these machines were the best that anybody ever made for cylinder machines, the metal one in the III being a close derivative of the shape of the ones in the 1A and 1B. This metal horn has a fairly complex shape and was never used in any other Ediso n product. Greg Bogantz- Original Message -- --- From: Steven Medved steve_noreen at msn.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 10:26 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Research: Amberolas 1A and 1B How does it compare with the 1B sound wise since the horn is different? Steve Hey Jim, My Amberola III is absolutely one of my very favorite machines. Sounds superblooks superb..plays wax Amberols like no other vintage machine I have ever heard... It makes me happy. Bestest, Michael Khanchalian (cyldoc) ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org __ _ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing
[Phono-L] Research: Amberolas 1A and 1B
George, I'll be sending the data on my 1A and 1B to you separately. But I got to thinking that there may be some more variations among these early amberolas that you ought to explore. Several years ago there was some discussion on some of the phono boards about the rarity - or not - of the split hoof foot on the early Pooley cabinet (third picture from left on page 163 of Frow). In my experience most of the Pooley 1As that I've seen have the split hoof. Whereas my 1B has the lion's paw feet. It would be interesting if you also gathered this information from our readers. Also, I think I've seen newer Pooley style cabinets (perhaps actually made by Edison) that did not have the grille louvers on the sides of the cabinet. Frow also mentions that variations of the Pooley cabinet were made such that the same cabinet could be used for both amberolas and the first disc machines. He says that there is a height variation of some 2 inches among these versions. And evidently only the earliest Herzog cabinets had the flat lock key whereas the later cabinets used the more common barrel style key. So I'm suggesting that you add four more items to your questionnaire: -- Style of front foot (split hoof, lion's paw, other) -- Presence and number of louvers on cabinet side -- Height of cabinet (not counting casters) -- Type of key (flat or barrel) Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: gpaul2...@aol.com To: phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2008 11:46 AM Subject: [Phono-L] Research: Amberolas 1A and 1B I'm asking for data from owners of Amberolas 1A and 1B. I'm working on an article on the early Amberolas, similar to a study done on suitcase Homes two years ago and published in The Sound Box. Data received will be compiled in an article scheduled to appear in the March 2009 issue of The Sound Box, and all contributors will be acknowledged. (If you'd like your data/identity to be kept confidential, I will of course honor your wishes. I can be contacted directly at gpaul2000 at aol.com.) I'm looking for the following information from owners of Amberolas 1A or 1B: 1) Type (1A or 1B)? 2) Serial Number (and do data plate and mechanism numbers match? 3) Lid: smooth or stepped? 4) Upper front corner posts: plain or carved? 5) Grille: Lyre, first rococo, or second rococo (all shown on page 163 of Frow)? 6) Apron (bottom of cabinet): wavy or more flattened (as shown on page 163 of Frow)? 7) Drawers: wooden separators or metal clips? I will gratefully accept data here at Phono-L, or at gpaul2000 at aol.com. Thanks in advance for your help! Best to all, George Paul ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] Research: Amberolas 1A and 1B
Steve, the 1A and 1B horns are very odd. They're made of a fibrous material, molded or layed up against a form. Different from anything else that Edison ever did. Someone on one of these phono boards had the answer in a previous posting, but I can't remember the details. Hopefully they will respond with a clear description. Anyway, the horns are well damped due to this construction technique and don't exhibit the ringing and resonances that are common with metal horns, which is one of the reasons they sound so good. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Steven Medved steve_nor...@msn.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 1:35 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Research: Amberolas 1A and 1B Thanks so much, what was the 1A horn made of? Steve From: gbogantz1 at charter.net To: phono-l at oldcrank.org Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 22:40:02 -0400 Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Research: Amberolas 1A and 1B I have all three machines, the Amberola 1A, 1B, and III. The III is very close to the 1B in sound, but I think it's a little more midrangey due to the metal horn. But it does sound very good, and it's my second favorite 4-minute cylinder player on the basis of sound quality, the 1B being the best commercially produced 4-minute cylinder machine ever made in my opinion. George Paul and I are having this discussion currently over on the OTV board, and we both agree also that the 1A is the best sounding commercially available 2 minute machine. The horns used in all these machines were the best that anybody ever made for cylinder machines, the metal one in the III being a close derivative of the shape of the ones in the 1A and 1B. This metal horn has a fairly complex shape and was never used in any other Ediso n product. Greg Bogantz- Original Message - From: Steven Medved steve_noreen at msn.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 10:26 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Research: Amberolas 1A and 1BHow does it compare with the 1B sound wise since the horn is different? Steve Hey Jim, My Amberola III is absolutely one of my very favorite machines. Sounds superblooks superb..plays wax Amberols like no other vintage machine I have ever heard... It makes me happy. Bestest, Michael Khanchalian (cyldoc) ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] Research: Amberolas 1A and 1B (Greg Bogantz)
Bruce, the only reason that I discount the 1A from being the best cylinder player is because of its inferior motor. The straight-cut spur gears of the 1A are decidedly noisier than the Opera motor of the 1B and the III. When I first got my 1A, it sounded like and electric drill whenever I ran it. The noise comes mostly from the high speed governor gears, and the only fix for it is to replace these gears with nearly perfect new ones. Try to find those anywhere! I got lucky and swapped a fellow collector some items for a set of nearly new gears which quieted my 1A down to the point where it is enjoyable, but still not as quiet as my 1B. The other big problem with the 1A is that it doesn't have the mechanical flutter filter and flywheel that Edison added to some of his later motors such as the Opera, Amberola V, and all the late amberolas. The lack of a sufficient flywheel coupled with the belt drive of the 1A virtually ensures that you'll get flutter and wow that is just an essential aspect of this design. Acoustically, the 1A is the same as the 1B, but the motor spoils the total experience a little. However, since the 1A motor is no worse than any found on any other 2 minute cylinder machine, the superior horn of the 1A makes it the best overall 2 minute machine in my estimation. AND it has the added benefit that you can play 2 minute celluloid records with the Diamond A reproducer which is truly the best 2 minute experience that you can get in a commercially made machine. I like my 1A just fine, but I prefer to hear 4 minute celluloids on my 1B or my III. I don't include the Opera among the very best sounding machines because I haven't heard ANY commercially made outside horns on cylinder machines that are the sonic equal to the horns in the Amberola 1s and III. I mentioned on the OTV board that I have a mechanical engineer friend who decided to make his own large genuine cygnet shaped exponential outside horn. He has fitted it to an Amberola 50 motor which he has put into a custom tabletop cabinet. The horn is suspended over the carriage by a clever, original design double crane pantographic system that works much better than any original design. He calls his machine the Ediphonic and has even put an Edison-style logo on it with that name. The reproducer is a modified Diamond B which has a custom diaphragm in it similar to the ones that I make. The entire project is very well-done, tidy, and authentic looking. I can tell you with first-ear assurance that this is the BEST sounding acoustic 4 minute cylinder player I have EVER heard. The exponential horn works wonderfully well with the Diamond B, and the results from playing the early directly recorded BA records (not the dubs) is some of the best sounding acoustic reproduction you will ever hear. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: valecnik57-p...@yahoo.com To: phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 5:46 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Research: Amberolas 1A and 1B (Greg Bogantz) Greg, I'd be interested to know more about why an Amberola 1A would not sound equally as good as the 1B for 4 min wax or blue amberols assuming the correct reproducer is used, (the M for 4 min wax and the diamond A for blue amberols)? Thanks, Bruce Bruce Johnson Pod Valem II, 870 252 43 Pruhonice Czech Republic Tel: (CZ) + 420 602 362 473 Tel: (US) + 1 612 605 5242 From: phono-l-request at oldcrank.org phono-l-request at oldcrank.org To: phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 8:00:05 PM Subject: Phono-L Digest, Vol 5, Issue 288 Send Phono-L mailing list submissions to phono-l at oldcrank.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://oldcrank.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/phono-l or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to phono-l-request at oldcrank.org You can reach the person managing the list at phono-l-owner at oldcrank.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of Phono-L digest... If you reply, please change your subject line and don't include this entire digest in your message.Today's Topics: 1. Re: Loss To Phono Collector Community (Zonophone2006 at aol.com) 2. Re: Research: Amberolas 1A and 1B (Michael F. Khanchalian) 3. Re: Research: Amberolas 1A and 1B (Steven Medved) 4. Re: Research: Amberolas 1A and 1B (Greg Bogantz) 5. Re: Research: Amberolas 1A and 1B (Rich) 6. Re: Phono-L Digest, Vol 5, Issue 287 (RROCRREC at aol.com) 7. Dave Boruff (Mark Dawson) 8. Re: Research: Amberolas 1A and 1B (Steven Medved) 9. Re: Research: Amberolas 1A and 1B (Greg Bogantz) ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] Research: Amberolas 1A and 1B
I have all three machines, the Amberola 1A, 1B, and III. The III is very close to the 1B in sound, but I think it's a little more midrangey due to the metal horn. But it does sound very good, and it's my second favorite 4-minute cylinder player on the basis of sound quality, the 1B being the best commercially produced 4-minute cylinder machine ever made in my opinion. George Paul and I are having this discussion currently over on the OTV board, and we both agree also that the 1A is the best sounding commercially available 2 minute machine. The horns used in all these machines were the best that anybody ever made for cylinder machines, the metal one in the III being a close derivative of the shape of the ones in the 1A and 1B. This metal horn has a fairly complex shape and was never used in any other Edison product. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Steven Medved steve_nor...@msn.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 10:26 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Research: Amberolas 1A and 1B How does it compare with the 1B sound wise since the horn is different? Steve Hey Jim, My Amberola III is absolutely one of my very favorite machines. Sounds superblooks superb..plays wax Amberols like no other vintage machine I have ever heard... It makes me happy. Bestest, Michael Khanchalian (cyldoc) ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] Columbia BF Peerless
Columbia did make the BF in a 24 minute version. I have one. Or else they made an adaptor kit to convert the machines. The 24 minute gearing is accomplished the same way it is on other Columbias of this vintage - there is a spider planetary idler gear mounted inside the gear housing that is either engaged or disengaged via a lever that fits inside a slot on the gear cover over the feed screw. The Columbia #12 Lyric reproducer is used with the 24 minute machines. These have a single tubular sapphire rod instead of a button stylus which is the proper size for playing 4 minute records. Obviously, this small stylus will eat up 2 minute wax records, but Columbia didn't care as they were making celluloid 2 and 4 minute records at that time. I don't see the gear shift lever on this eBay machine, so it's probably the 2 minute model. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: BruceY bruce78...@comcast.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 7:31 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Columbia BF Peerless Thanks, as I thought. I had never heard of a 4 minute BF Peerless, and I have one exactly like it. yes indeed, must have some funky bidders out there, funking up the prices. Bruce - Original Message - From: Loran Hughes loran at oldcrank.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 7:10 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Columbia BF Peerless I agree with George. The price is as funky as the BA will sound ;) Loran On Oct 15, 2008, at 3:57 PM, George Glastris wrote: It seems quite high, but all the bidders are fairly new. And no, there is no 4-minute attachment on it so that Blue Amberol is going to sound funky. George ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] Columbia BC friction wheel drive
I just received this link to a forum thread devoted to the Columbia BC. Reid Welch has fitted new friction parts to a BC and has had good success with them. He even includes a video of his machine in operation! The only one on the internet, I think. There's hope for us BC owners yet! Good stuff. Enjoy: http://www.forum.condorcup.com/viewtopic.php?f=7t=20p=59#p51 Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: zonophone2...@aol.com To: phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2008 5:16 AM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Columbia BC friction wheel drive paul baker used to restore these but he takes a long time to do it In a message dated 8/30/2008 3:49:30 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, steve_noreen at msn.com writes: Hi Greg, Does anyone make reproduction parts for these reproducers? Steve : [Phono-L] Columbia BC friction wheel drive Ron, it's difficult to explain the BC friction wheel driveshaft system without pictures or handwaving :o) The drive train begins with a gear-driven piece of metal tubing which is enclosed in the stationary outer housing which is fastened to the gear housing casting on the side of the machine. This first piece of tubing (call it part 1) rotates but does not translate axially. Inside this rotating tubing is the brass coupling sleeve (part 2) which can rotate and also slide along its axis. And inside the brass sleeve is the solid rod (part 3) which connects with the amber wheel. This part 3 rotates and also slides axially. Part 2 has two slots, diametrically opposed and milled into its outside surface that run almost the full length of the part. Part 1 transmits its torque via two setscrews which extend inward from Part 1 into the slots milled in part 2. (Access to these screws is via a hole drilled in the s tationary outer tube.) This allows Part 2 to be rotated by part 1 and also to slide axially inside part 1. Part 3 has a T shaped fixture at its end that engages two longitudinal slots milled INSIDE of part 2. This is what transmits the torque from part 2 to part 3 and also allows part 3 to translate axially. The slots inside of part 2 do not extend all the way to the ends of part 2. When part 3 is pulled along the mandrel with the reproducer, its T fixture hits the ends of the slots inside of part 2 and thereby drags part 2 along with it axially. All this assemblage has a purposefully sloppy fit to allow the amber wheel end of part 3 to wobble around radially so it can follow the stylus assembly as it is raised and lowered from the record surface. Clear as mud? Again, it's hard to envision what's happening without seeing the structure in detail. But maybe this helps understand it. Greg Bogantz ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org **It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here. (http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv000547) ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] Columbia no. 5 reproducer repair for Columbia AO
Columbia made a special sapphire stylus for their 24 minute reproducers. It was a sapphire rod, rather like the concept of the tungstone wire. The diameter was small enough to fit properly in the 4 minute groove. Like the wire, the rod did not change shape during it's useful life until it wore completely down. The problem, of course, is that it is too small to work properly with 2 minute wax records, and it will gouge them. But Columbia didn't care if you wore out your Edison records on it because Columbia was selling only celluloid records by that time :o) Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Steven Medved steve_nor...@msn.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2008 8:39 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Columbia no. 5 reproducer repair for Columbia AO What type of cylinder stylus did Columbia make beside the ball stylus? Steve From: Zonophone2006 at aol.com Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2008 16:09:53 -0400 To: phono-l at oldcrank.org Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Columbia no. 5 reproducer repair for Columbia AO hi ray et al on mine i cant tell you i still need to find an appropriate stylus mine did not come with oneIn a message dated 9/5/2008 11:19:17 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, wilenzick at bellsouth.net writes: I have an AO, but not an AW. I have been told that the sound quality of the AW reproducer is inferior to that of the AO, so why would anyone want to convert the machines. Is that true? Ray - Original Message - From: Zonophone2006 at aol.com To: phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 10:30 AM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Columbia no. 5 reproducer repair for Columbia AOHI I have an ao and an aow the reproducer and the neck it sits on are totally different on these so be careful in trying to convert oneIn a message dated 9/3/2008 4:3 7:11 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, valecnik57-purc at yahoo.com writes: I'm looking for recommendations regarding someone who could expertly repair the reproducer on my Columbia AO. It's the floating type, a no. 5, I believe although it is not marked in any way. Would also be interested in the conversion kit to install the model 8 reproducer, which essentially converts an AO to an AW. Thanks, Bruce - ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org **It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here. (http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv000547) ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ** Pt...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog, plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com. (http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty000514) ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] Cheap Opera
I'm surprised that most of the fabulous phonos at the Skinner auction didn't bring more. This Opera with Music Master horn only brought $3500. Assuming these phonos were in good condition, which you couldn't really tell from the skimpy photos that were provided, the prices seem surprisingly low: http://cgi.liveauctions.ebay.com/811-Edison-Opera-Phonograph-Type-SM-Model-A-No-981_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQ_trkparmsZ72Q3a552Q7c39Q3a1Q7c66Q3a2Q7c65Q3a12Q7c240Q3a1318QQ_trksidZp3911Q2ec0Q2em14QQhashZitem220266997472QQitemZ220266997472 Ditto the Vic VI with speartip horn, the Victrola XVIII, and the Edison Triumph E with 11 panel cygnet - the horn alone was worth the $950 price. That Columbia BC with huge horn was a steal at $1600. Assuming that 42 inch horn is correct and original, it's rare and unique to the BC having a large throat to connect to the large BC reproducer. The only thing that seemed to go high was the Class M, and that was said to be a cob job with a Triumph top and customized idler pulleys, yet it went for 22 grand. I guess the hard times have finally hit the hi end phono market. Apparently only the VERY RARE stuff is still commanding big bux. I guess when you've already got all the merely rare stuff, you've by definition got too much money, so you don't bat an eye when a super-rare piece crosses your path. Jeeves, bring the checkbook 'round. I've just seen a trinket I don't yet have. Greg Bogantz
[Phono-L] Vogue Picture Records values
Yes, the vinyl records from the postwar period have held up surprisingly well so far. Certainly better than magnetic tape from that period. If you can manage to find a Vogue that hasn't been played or scratched to death, the sound quality on them is pretty good. But one of their potential problems is the oxidation of the aluminum substrate. I have more than one Vogue that has been severely cracked or chipped in years past which has allowed moisture and air to get to the aluminum surface. This causes mild to severe powderizing and bubbling of oxide to form on the aluminum which then bubbles up the paper and vinyl sheet laid on top of it. This damage can usually be heard before it's seen - the bubbling causes a noticeable increase in the rumble content when you play the record. I'm not sure why Vogues were made with an aluminum substrate rather than using a vinyl core as is done with modern picture records. Might have been a patent infringement thing since RCA and others had made picture records in the 1930s. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Douglas Houston cdh...@earthlink.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 2:45 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Vogue Picture Records values Indeed. There have been very few plastics that have had any permanence. Catalin has shown to be more stable than many others, but when the plasticizer finally dries out of the plasticx, it's curtains for the piece. In the thirties, plastics were all the panic. There were things shown in plastics that were downright sensational. I'm sure that a lot of people thought that glass would soon be made obsolete by gorgeous plastic things. Well, my mother and my aunt didn't throw out their cut crystal, and I now have a couple of cabinets full of it. In those days (that I remember so well), the automotive industry went ballistic over plastics too. Today, there are guys who re-mold steering wheels for those cars. The big plstic was Tenite I, a plastic by Tennessee Eastman in Kingsport, Tennessee. You'll travel long and far to see an original steering wheel on a prewar car!. However, I have a '38 Cadillac, with the original steering wheel, and still decent dash plastic, and you just don't ever see that. Which brings us to the Vogue records. Tom Saffady, a tool and die maker on East eight mile road in East Detroit (Across 8 Mile from Detroit) got the idea of making these pretty records. I understand that he used an aluminum base, attached the artwork to it, and molded the plastic to it, pressing the recording in the same operation. While I don't know for sure what the plastic is, I'm sure that it's a vinyl, and of the best quality at the time. When they hit the stores, they made quite a splash, and they sold well, more for their novel character than anything else. No surprise, they were priced higher than the major brand shellac discs, but their charm gave them their value. Sadly, the novelty wore off, and Saffady wasn't able to get the price down to meet the competition. He had tried to have a multiple pressing rig, to perss (I believe) nine discs at once, but it never worked. He folded, unfortunately, and his building later housed a cutthroat department store caled something like Hall of bargains. One day, I passed there, and the place had been gutted by fire, and not all of the walls were standing. I believe that there is a fast food place on that site today. So, what about the plastic that Sav-Way Industries (Tom Saffady) used on those discs? Astoundingly, it seems to have held up very well. Since Vinyl plastics harden and shrink with age, I would worry about the Vogue discs deteriorating at some time in the future. Plastics are not permanent, and the newest Vogue disc is about 62 byears old. The aluminum core will not shrink, but the plastic could. [Original Message] From: Greg Bogantz gbogantz1 at charter.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Date: 8/13/2008 5:02:57 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Vogue Picture Records values Doug, it's especially ironic that you use the phrase the base in the catalin game is crumbling. Not just the base, but the cabinets themselves. Catalin degenerates steadily and eventually falls apart with age. Shoving a bunch of money at catalin is like stacking time bombs on your shelf. Not unlike investing in Edison 4-minute wax amberols. Sit them on your shelf and listen for the steady clink, tink, clunk of the records self-destructing as the temperature and humidity changes in your house. Investors who sink a lot of money in these absurdities deserve what they're going to get - a pile of dust before it's all over. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Douglas Houston cdh041 at earthlink.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2008 4:43 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Vogue
[Phono-L] Vogue Picture Records values
Doug, it's especially ironic that you use the phrase the base in the catalin game is crumbling. Not just the base, but the cabinets themselves. Catalin degenerates steadily and eventually falls apart with age. Shoving a bunch of money at catalin is like stacking time bombs on your shelf. Not unlike investing in Edison 4-minute wax amberols. Sit them on your shelf and listen for the steady clink, tink, clunk of the records self-destructing as the temperature and humidity changes in your house. Investors who sink a lot of money in these absurdities deserve what they're going to get - a pile of dust before it's all over. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Douglas Houston cdh...@earthlink.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2008 4:43 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Vogue Picture Records values Reading all these comments looks like the replay of a lot of collector's panics over the years. I saw it with coins, back in the sixties, with a friend who was into them, and I probably know of other similar situations as well. The price level spirals up to the point that the only exchanges are from dealer to dealer. Dealers begin to get tired of getting the same item over and over, and somewhere, somebody stops buying. It is then, that the tower tumbles, and a lot of nspeculators lose a bundle on now-lowered value stuff. One thing that comes to mind right now, is the hunger for radios with catalin cabinets. They've gone thousands of bucks for some models. As far as radios go, the chassis in them are 99.% cheap, and dinky. It's the pretty plastic cases that are the real issue. It isn't radio collectors that want them. It's those who want the pret-ty colorful cabinets, and of course, the capital gains that result from the exchange of them. On the surface, at least, there has never been any short supply of them. There are dealers in the big rado meets, who have 20 or 30 of them on their table. It's amusing that lots of sellers on the 'bay call a bakelite radio cabinet Catalin. I'm sure that many a buyer has been badly jostled by one of those shysters, but the buyer should research, and know what he / she is buying. Anyway, it's now beginning th look like the base in the catalin game is crumbling. There are signs that prices are possibly on the way down, and I'd be delighted to see it happen. The cabinets are pretty; the radios are garbage. One of the things that killed Vogue records in the first place was that they never had a hit. I also recall that they were priced at $1.05, while the major labels sold for $.75 I bought a couple of them, new back then, not for what was on them, but because they were pretty. Someone has already said that Vogue discs are desirable, not so much for their programmatic content, but their cuteness. Today, wise people are pulling in their horns, and hanging on to their mazuma. We are already in an economic slump, and it promises to get slumpier. I can imagine other scenarios like this in the days ahead. [Original Message] From: Mike Stitt smstitt at gmail.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Date: 8/13/2008 2:13:30 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Vogue Picture Records values Vogues went high after Ed Curry's book. Before the book they were cheap. I even found them at Goodwill. The market is very soft across the board. High prices bring more to market. eBay helped to do that. Collectors get all they need. I suggest Vogues in the market exceeded interested or new collectors entering into that market. Most casual collectors are content to have a few as they define a genre. Few want a complete number run (production run) at a $100 a pop. IMHO. The Queen for a Day a few years back went for stupid money. I have many Vogues and have little interest in them at those prices. Mike On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 10:37 AM, Albert cenfin at comcast.net wrote: for sure, I got bit by the bug and bought up as many as I could trying to complete the collection and I almost did, but have probably lost about half of my investment. I am missing the Transformer and Queen for a Day. I have to assume those are still worth a lot. Al - Original Message - From: wilenzick at bellsouth.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2008 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Vogue Picture Records values Thanks for your interesting comment on the Vogues. I agree with you on the reason for the drop in value of the Wurlitzer 1015, but I am not so sure the same argument applies to the Vogues. The 1015's were bought and sold as entertainment devices, and the bars, etc. that bought them for 45s and CDs could care less if they were original or reproduction machines. On the other hand, vogues were generally not bought for their music content, but rather as vintage collectibles
[Phono-L] Styli
The rule of thumb here is the same as that for playing lateral-cut records: Use whatever stylus size sounds the best. That's not a flippant remark. Depending on where the wear has been inflicted on the groove walls, you can use a non-standard stylus size to ride on an unworn portion of the groove and get better sound. This may mean you need to use a smaller one to ride lower in the groove or a larger one to ride higher in the groove, whatever gets around the worn portion better. And you never know when you begin on a particular record what stylus is going to sound the best until you try several of them. The case with vertical cut records is a little different because the wear is nearly always at the very bottom of the groove. In this case, you can get better playback if you use a very large diameter or a special truncated stylus to try to bridge the worn area, but it's a bit more difficult. For vertical records in good condition, you can use just about any size stylus you want, so long as you are using a low tracking force, say 2 grams or less, which is no problem for modern cartridges and tonearms. I tend to use a conventional LP stylus (0.7 to 1.0 mil radius) for starters when playing DDs or Pathes and it usually works pretty well. You have to adjust your anti-skating force on the tonearm pretty carefully to prevent skating or groove skipping, especially when playing the VERY shallow Pathe grooves. Likewise, an LP stylus should work well for playing celluloid 2 or 4 minute cylinders. Use of a smaller stylus tip will reduce tracing distortion and improve high frequency performance. However, I would advise that you use a large, original sized stylus when playing any wax cylinders, even with low tracking force. This would be about 3 mil for 4 minute and 6 mil for 2 minute. The wax is so soft that a sharper stylus will cut the wax even at 2 grams tracking force. The 3 mil styli are fairly easily obtained from several sources for the popular Shure and Stanton/Pickering cartridges. But you just about have to go to Expert Stylus in England to get a 6 mil size. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: jim...@earthlink.net To: Phono-L at oldcrank.org Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 1:40 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Styli A friend has asked me to record electrically some of my vertical-cut Pathe records I also want to record electrically Edison Diamond Discs two four-minute cylinders.I have sophisticated equipment for playing 78s electrically (for 17 years I produced a weekly show for the local FM station of Classical 78s) including a Packburn Noise Suppressor which has switch for playing vertical-cut recordings but I need styluses to play Pathe, Diamond Discs, two four-minute cylinders (using a Rabco tangential tracking arm the mandrel motor from an Amberola 30) that will fit either a Shure M44 cartridge, Shure M78S cartridge or Shure Model V cartridge If any of you all have had experience in electrically-reproducing vertical-cut records of various types can advise me on sources for such styli I would greatly appreciate it. (I know of Expert Pickups in England but their prices are out of this world so I hope to find a more affordable source.0 Thanks! Jim Cartwright Immortal Performances jimcip at earthlink.net EarthLink Revolves Around You. ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] AB's and gear oiling
The issue with using oil or grease on metal parts is whether it dries up and gets sticky over time. This can be especially detrimental on very low-torque mechanisms such as the escapement or verge of a clockwork. Also, oiling must be done with the right formula when applied to non-metallic surfaces such as the fiber gears on some phonographs. Some people prefer not to oil fiber gears at all. Some fiber gears are designed to run dry if they mesh with a highly polished worm gear. But high-torque gears such as the winding gears where the crank shaft meshes with the spring barrel and the output or bull gear on the spring barrel on phonographs should be lubricated with a heavy oil or grease. These are often steel-on-steel gears. I restore both clocks and phonos and I usually grease the high-torque gears on the spring barrel of phonos and use a 20 weight or so oil on all the other metal gears, including the high-speed governor gears and pivots. I actually use a mixture of petroleum oil and a PTFE additive such as Slick 50 for my middle weight applications. The PTFE works especially well on sliding surfaces such as the ways that support the reproducer on cylinder phonos. Sliding surfaces lubricated this way hold their lubricity for a very long time. Clocks have considerably lower torque in their spring barrels, so a medium weight oil is all that's necessary on them. Then I oil the pivots and higher speed gears with a very light clock oil. These oils are designed not to gunk up and won't get sticky. I do not oil the escapement mechanism at all, whether pendulum or balance wheel type, although I do oil their pivots with the light oil. I agree that 3-in-1 oil is not good for these purposes. And WD-40 is a BAD idea as it gets sticky quite quickly when the solvent evaporates from it. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Ron L lhera...@bu.edu To: 'Antique Phonograph List' phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 3:03 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] AB's and gear oiling Why would oil ruin the phonograph? Is it an issue of uneven wear with dissimilar materials? Ron L -Original Message- From: phono-l-bounces at oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-bounces at oldcrank.org] On Behalf Of Rich Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 2:29 PM To: Antique Phonograph List Subject: Re: [Phono-L] AB's and gear oiling You do not oil gears except in special cases. Many people are not swayed by sound engineering practices and proceed to ruin good phonographs. Clocks have brass meshed with steel and so do most phonographs. IF you find similar materials meshed with each other then an extremely light coat is beneficial. Use a synthetic oil or a clock oil. The 3 in 1 oil is crap. Mike Stitt wrote: The recent thread about the AB MacDonald brings up a good question. Among the many things I collect includes clocks. Now in the world of clocks you never oil gears, no and no. Should you oil gears in phonographs? Would the higher rate of speed of the governor be a rationale? Would the presumed higher loads from a larger spring dictate oiling? I do and have oiled phonograph gears. Should we? And break the clock rule? Mike ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] Copper cygnet horn
My guess is that this is a custom-made horn for a phonograph. It has the hanger hook at the top of the elbow for use with a crane which is required for the early phonos. No radio horns that I've ever seen used a crane and hanger arrangement - they were self-supporting. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: wilenz...@bellsouth.net To: Phono-L at oldcrank.org Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2008 5:17 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Copper cygnet horn This eBay item is a Fireside with a COPPER cygnet horn. Was such a horn ever made, either for phonos or radios? http://cgi.ebay.com/Edison-Fireside-Model-A-Phonograph_W0QQitemZ330251905774QQcmdZViewItem?hash=item330251905774_trksid=p3286.m14.l1318 Ray ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] Edison DD record #370058046814
These thin ruby colored discs were made for the electronic Ediphone disc office dictation machine of the 1940s and 50s. A number of designs were produced over a fairly long product life, and the machines were among the last products produced by TAE Inc. in West Orange, and were produced even after WWII. The disc dictation machine was eventually replaced by the Edisette cassette tape dictation machine in the 1960s. The red discs are originally completely smooth and are then cut and recorded vertically with a very small groove and can be played on a modern turntable with microgroove stylus and wired for vertical response. Disc speed was about 20rpm. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: George victr...@triton.net To: Phono-L phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 3:12 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Edison DD record #370058046814 I do not recall ever seeing one of these. What are they? Thank you, George http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=370058046814ru=http%3A%2F%2Fsearch.ebay.com%3A80%2Fsearch%2Fsearch.dll%3Ffrom%3DR40%26_trksid%3Dm37%26satitle%3D370058046814%26category0%3D%26fvi%3D1 ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] What is this? Atwater Kent Type 5V phonograph attachment
Several manufacturers made these, with Atwater Kent being one of the most popular. They allowed your radio to be played thru the horn of your phonograph. While this may sound silly to us now, in the 1920s the radio speakers were pretty feeble and rather poor sounding. And most radio sets of the day required that you separately purchase the speaker. For those owners who already had a nice phonograph with a good horn on it, these speaker drivers were a good solution. The speaker driver was less costly than a complete radio speaker, and in many cases the driver sounded better when played thru a good phonograph horn than any separate radio speaker of the day. This was especially true in the late 1920s if you had an orthophonic horn in your Victor console phono. The model number of the A-K drivers indicates the type of phono they were designed to fit. The 5V model indicates that it was designed for coupling to the Victor tonearm in place of the standard phono reproducer. I believe the ones designed for Columbia machines were a model number something like 5C. I don't recall if there were any A-K drivers made to fit Edison machines. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: ny victrolaman victrola...@gmail.com To: phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 2:01 PM Subject: [Phono-L] What is this? Atwater Kent Type 5V phonograph attachment So I was cleaning out some storage and came across what looks like a large 1920s radio horn speaker driver, which I must have picked up someplace years ago. It's about three inches in diameter, with a nine-foot cord, and it's quite heavy for its size. (The driver itself tests very good.) On the top it is embossed Atwater Kent, Phila and Type 5V. After doing some digging, I found an old ad for it on that great AK website. The ad lists it as a Phonograph Attachment, but says nothing about what exactly that is, what it does, and how exactly one would use it. I recall seeing some old ads where something of this nature is sitting on a motorboard next to a reproducer, but that tells me nothing. Does any out there know about these things? Anyone own one, or is anyone looking for one? I'll be happy to send you pictures if it'll help clear this up. Thanks in advance. ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] What is this? Atwater Kent Type 5V phonographattachment
From my experience, the type 5V is the most common by far. I rarely see the other A-K variants of this driver. The 5V turn up moderately often on eBay and sell for 5 to 50 bux. They're probably the most in demand by people who collect both radios and phonos as they are a good crossover collectible. These were most popular in the period before about 1925. I suspect that not many of the later ones designed to fit the orthophonic phonos were sold due to the fact that radio speaker technology was improving very rapidly with the introduction of the Kellogg dynamic speaker in 1925. By 1929 the radios sets complete with built-in speakers were sounding better than the acoustic phonos and the reverse adapter become popular - an electric pickup that could be fitted to an acoustic tonearm and which was wired into your radio so that you could play records thru your radio! Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: ny victrolaman victrola...@gmail.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 3:03 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] What is this? Atwater Kent Type 5V phonographattachment Well, that explains it, then. Thanks for the info. I tried it out on a Victrola and it fit like a glove! According to this ad, AK also offered a Type 6C, which I guess would have been for Columbias, as well as a Type VE-O and a Type VE-E, both of which were gold-plated. I imagine those must have been for Orthophonics, or maybe Electrolas? So would this type of thing appeal more to radio collectors or phonograph collectors? (I'm both, but I don't have any 1920s sets anymore. I stick to the superhets these days.) Do they turn up very often? What do they bring? On 6/4/08, Greg Bogantz gbogantz1 at charter.net wrote: Several manufacturers made these, with Atwater Kent being one of the most popular. They allowed your radio to be played thru the horn of your phonograph. While this may sound silly to us now, in the 1920s the radio speakers were pretty feeble and rather poor sounding. And most radio sets of the day required that you separately purchase the speaker. For those owners who already had a nice phonograph with a good horn on it, these speaker drivers were a good solution. The speaker driver was less costly than a complete radio speaker, and in many cases the driver sounded better when played thru a good phonograph horn than any separate radio speaker of the day. This was especially true in the late 1920s if you had an orthophonic horn in your Victor console phono. The model number of the A-K drivers indicates the type of phono they were designed to fit. The 5V model indicates that it was designed for coupling to the Victor tonearm in place of the standard phono reproducer. I believe the ones designed for Columbia machines were a model number something like 5C. I don't recall if there were any A-K drivers made to fit Edison machines. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: ny victrolaman victrolaman at gmail.com To: phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 2:01 PM Subject: [Phono-L] What is this? Atwater Kent Type 5V phonograph attachment So I was cleaning out some storage and came across what looks like a large 1920s radio horn speaker driver, which I must have picked up someplace years ago. It's about three inches in diameter, with a nine-foot cord, and it's quite heavy for its size. (The driver itself tests very good.) On the top it is embossed Atwater Kent, Phila and Type 5V. After doing some digging, I found an old ad for it on that great AK website. The ad lists it as a Phonograph Attachment, but says nothing about what exactly that is, what it does, and how exactly one would use it. I recall seeing some old ads where something of this nature is sitting on a motorboard next to a reproducer, but that tells me nothing. Does any out there know about these things? Anyone own one, or is anyone looking for one? I'll be happy to send you pictures if it'll help clear this up. Thanks in advance. ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] edisonic vs. dance?
Ron L is correct. But both of these springs were bad ideas to begin with. They were a lame attempt to account for the escessive bias placed on the diaphragm by the extra weight which causes the diaphragm to be stressed (and strained) downward even more by the tension in the stylus bar link. The extra weight used in the Dance and Edisonic models was required to reduce mistracking and distortion when playing highly modulated records, particularly the later electrics. It DOES NOT make the reproducer play louder, contrary to the bilge in the Edison blurbs to that effect. The loudness can only be controlled by changing the mechanical gain of the stylus bar which is the ratio of the stylus tip distance to the bar pivot relative to the distance from the bar pivot to the link. This ratio is the same for ALL Edison DD stylus bars, hence they all play at the same loudness. You can confirm this to yourself by using the different models of reproducer to play very soft recordings which do not tax the reproducers - they will all sound the same loudness. The fact that they may sound different when playing loud recordings is due to the differences in mistracking and distortion that they exhibit on those records. This biasing of the diaphragm is indigenous to the tracking of vertical modulation and is one of the several problems with that technology. (This problem does not exist with lateral reproduction.) Having a permanent bias or bend in one direction while playing a record causes the diaphragm to exhibit assymmetric nonlinear behavior (due to it nonlinear elasticity) which is yet another contributor to the generation of even orders (2nd, 4th, 6th, etc.) of harmonic distortion. Edison tried to reduce this bias (or permanent bending offset under playing tension) of the diaphragm with the addition of these springs into his later models of DD reproducers. There is a lot of bloviation about the purpose of the springs in his patent disclosure for the Dance reproducer, but compensation for the bias was their intended purpose. It didn't work. Mostly because he didn't account for the added spring constants these springs introduced into the diaphragm resonance which changes and/or adds to the mechanical resonances of the system. In particular, he didn't damp the springs sufficiently or at all. The diaphragm spring was designed with some damping in it, but it was ineffective. The stylus bar spring has no damping that I can find. Consequently, you can hear this spring ring when you play records. If you pay attention, you can hear a ringing noise behind the music which is this spring boinging or oscillating. Bad idea. My advice is to just remove both of these springs. The reproducer will sound cleaner and clearer with fewer resonances and extraneous noises. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Ron L lhera...@bu.edu To: 'Antique Phonograph List' phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 2:07 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] edisonic vs. dance? I believe one has two springs and the other has only one. I think the Edisonic has the spring only on the needle bar and the Dance has one on the diaphragm as well, hence the bolt-on neck. Ron L -Original Message- From: phono-l-bounces at oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-bounces at oldcrank.org] On Behalf Of Peter Fraser Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 1:46 PM To: Antique List Phonograph Subject: [Phono-L] edisonic vs. dance? can anyone expound on the differences between the Edison Dance reproducer and its successor, the Edisonic? As near as i can tell, it's just the bolt-on neck...but does the little spring have different characteristics? is there anything else? do they sound appreciably different when equally restored? thanks for anything you can offer... -- peter ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] edisonic vs. dance?
Not in my experience. Take the springs off the reproducer and the ringing goes away. Contrary to the Edison propaganda, these springs don't do anything useful. Yes, you can damp the ringing by coating the springs in RTV or slipping a rubber sleeve over them, but you get better performance by just taking them off altogether. Note that Edison himself must have given up on the interior diaphragm spring of the Dance design because he eliminated it when he went to the later Edisonic design. These extra springs add additional peaks to the frequency response corresponding to their own resonance and their modifications to the diaphragm resonance. Neither of which is desirable. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: jim...@earthlink.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:23 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] edisonic vs. dance? I think the ringing of the Edisonic Reproducer is due to the vibration of the weight, acting like a bell, being transmitted to the stylus bar thus to the diaphragm by the spring, not by vibrations generated by the spring itself. Jim Cartwright jimcip at earthlink.net EarthLink Revolves Around You. [Original Message] From: Greg Bogantz gbogantz1 at charter.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l at oldcrank.org Date: 5/8/2008 2:47:39 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] edisonic vs. dance? Ron L is correct. But both of these springs were bad ideas to begin with. They were a lame attempt to account for the escessive bias placed on the diaphragm by the extra weight which causes the diaphragm to be stressed (and strained) downward even more by the tension in the stylus bar link. The extra weight used in the Dance and Edisonic models was required to reduce mistracking and distortion when playing highly modulated records, particularly the later electrics. It DOES NOT make the reproducer play louder, contrary to the bilge in the Edison blurbs to that effect. The loudness can only be controlled by changing the mechanical gain of the stylus bar which is the ratio of the stylus tip distance to the bar pivot relative to the distance from the bar pivot to the link. This ratio is the same for ALL Edison DD stylus bars, hence they all play at the same loudness. You can confirm this to yourself by using the different models of reproducer to play very soft recordings which do not tax the reproducers - they will all sound the same loudness. The fact that they may sound different when playing loud recordings is due to the differences in mistracking and distortion that they exhibit on those records. This biasing of the diaphragm is indigenous to the tracking of vertical modulation and is one of the several problems with that technology. (This problem does not exist with lateral reproduction.) Having a permanent bias or bend in one direction while playing a record causes the diaphragm to exhibit assymmetric nonlinear behavior (due to it nonlinear elasticity) which is yet another contributor to the generation of even orders (2nd, 4th, 6th, etc.) of harmonic distortion. Edison tried to reduce this bias (or permanent bending offset under playing tension) of the diaphragm with the addition of these springs into his later models of DD reproducers. There is a lot of bloviation about the purpose of the springs in his patent disclosure for the Dance reproducer, but compensation for the bias was their intended purpose. It didn't work. Mostly because he didn't account for the added spring constants these springs introduced into the diaphragm resonance which changes and/or adds to the mechanical resonances of the system. In particular, he didn't damp the springs sufficiently or at all. The diaphragm spring was designed with some damping in it, but it was ineffective. The stylus bar spring has no damping that I can find. Consequently, you can hear this spring ring when you play records. If you pay attention, you can hear a ringing noise behind the music which is this spring boinging or oscillating. Bad idea. My advice is to just remove both of these springs. The reproducer will sound cleaner and clearer with fewer resonances and extraneous noises. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Ron L lherault at bu.edu To: 'Antique Phonograph List' phono-l at oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 2:07 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] edisonic vs. dance? I believe one has two springs and the other has only one. I think the Edisonic has the spring only on the needle bar and the Dance has one on the diaphragm as well, hence the bolt-on neck. Ron L -Original Message- From: phono-l-bounces at oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-bounces at oldcrank.org] On Behalf Of Peter Fraser Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 1:46 PM To: Antique List Phonograph Subject: [Phono-L] edisonic vs
[Phono-L] Vertical on DD, Edison on saphire?
Doug, the lateral tracking angle (LTA) error that you mention as being indigenous to the Brunswick Ultona when playing vertical recordings (either Edison or Pathe) is of no consequence so far as reproduction fidelity is concerned. LTA error describes the situation whereby the direction of lateral stylus motion is not perfectly radial with regard to the record. LTA error is caused by the tonearm overhang not being perfectly set at a given record diameter so as to produce stylus motion which is perfectly parallel to the modulation axis of the diaphragm (or other transducer). LTA error will produce some undesired effects when playing lateral-cut records. But purely mono vertical recordings such as Edisons and Pathes produce the same stylus tip motion, regardless of LTA, which results in the same diaphragm (or other transducer) motion which means that LTA has NO affect on reproduction of purely vertical modulation. The situation is complicated in the case of modern stereo recordings where there are two channels of audio, each comprised of a lateral and a vertical component, and LTA (as well as vertical tracking angle, VTA) does affect the reproduced signal. However, LTA does have an affect on the skating force delivered to the tonearm which may cause mistracking or groove skipping or sticking. Note that the Edison DD players DO have a significant amount of LTA designed into them as well, although not as much as an Ultona. Which had no detrimental affect on the reproduction, so Edison ignored it. But it did pose a problem with groove skipping when Edison released the long play (LP) version of the DD due to the extremely small and shallow groove shape. Edison had to minimize the LTA of the LP reproducer the best he could while still utilizing his original DD player tonearm design. He was able to do this by canting the reproducer weight at an angle relative to the output sound tube. Again, this was done only to reduce the incidence of groove skipping, not for reproduction quality reasons. Trying to use a DD reproducer for playing other vertical-cut records will immediately present a problem of how to pull the reproducer across the record. If you use the feedscrew of the DD player, you will probably not get good tracking for very long because most other records were not cut at the same pitch (number of lines per inch) as the DDs and the reproducer weight limit pin will hit the limit loop within just a few revolutions of the record. Trying to disengage the feedscrew on a DD player is not reasonable because the tonearm is extremely massive (it also moves the complete horn assembly) and has way too much friction for the record groove to move the tonearm, again resulting in groove skipping. Mounting the DD reproducer on a different tonearm would be possible, but no original equipment was designed for this. Ignoring the very real issue of pulling the reproducer across the record, the question of using an Edison DD reproducer on other types of records then becomes one of whether the stylus fits the groove shape properly. Most other vertical cut records had a substantially different groove shape from that of the DD. Pathe grooves were much wider and the use of the smaller DD stylus will tear them up rapidly. Other vertical records had basically a V-shaped fairly deep groove much the same as that used in lateral cuts. They were designed to be played with steel needles which would quickly wear themselves into the shape of the groove and thereby reduce the pressure on the groove walls and keep record wear to a minimum, just as with lateral records. Again, use of a DD diamond stylus in one of these V grooves will rapidly wear the record. Likewise, use of a stylus shape different from the Edison when playing DDs is not recommended at the high tracking forces required by acoustic reproducers. Too small a stylus will tear up the DD and too large a stylus tip will not fit into the groove which will result in groove skipping and much echo. However, the use of modern pickups with very light tracking force poses no problem for playing DDs. With tracking forces of about 4 grams or less, even with a considerably undersized stylus, there is so little pressure on the hard condensite record material that the material will not yield and no record wear should result. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Douglas Houston cdh...@earthlink.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 4:00 PM Subject: RE: [Phono-L] Vertical on DD, Edison on saphire? Ron: Of all people on this planet, I'm probably the least to comment intelligently about playing DD's on anything but an Edison phonograph. But, since, for instance, the Brunswick Ultona head plays a DD, and the disc carries the stylus across the record, it does so on an angle not done on an Edison player. The modulaion of the groove
[Phono-L] Seeburg Home Library
Doug, even though it's bigger than a Victor 10-50, it weighs about the same. The wood console cabinet was made and sold as two pieces. You could originally buy just the mechanism is you wanted to custom install it. Or you could buy just the wooden mechanism housing if you wanted it to be free standing. Or you could buy the lower record storage and speaker stand (also contained the power amp) as an option. Or you could order the entire ensemble complete as one model as you see it shown on the eBay listing. But the cabinets were still supplied as separate upper and lower sections. I have the mechanism and complete electronics for one of these which I've built into my own cabinet. I wasn't able to salvage the original cabinet. But from what I have and what I can see of the cabinet, I'm estimating that the entire upper section probably weighs about 200 pounds. And the lower section which is mostly empty probably weighs another 100 pounds for a combined weight of around 300 pounds. But it's still a BIG beast, even separated into two parts. You'd have to have a large pickup truck or a full-sized van to haul the thing. But it's a great toy. I use mine regularly. The mechanical design is beautiful, robust, and works like a charm. Despite the direct worm gearing (no rubber belts or drive pucks to wear out), there is no rumble, wow, or flutter in playback Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Douglas Houston cdh...@earthlink.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 2:51 PM Subject: RE: [Phono-L] Seeburg Home Library The thing is beautiful. I shudder to thnk what it weighs, though. [Original Message] From: Greg Bogantz gbogan...@charter.net To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Date: 3/30/2008 4:11:13 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Seeburg Home Library Hey guys, here's a rare opportunity to score one of the most unusual home phonographs ever made, the Seeburg Home Library: http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Seeberg-Automatic-Record-Console_W0QQitemZ260223 421468QQihZ016QQcategoryZ3283QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem In case you don't know what it is, this is the first 78rpm version of the Seeburg Select-O-Matic record changer which was introduced as the M100A jukebox in 1948. It is full intermix - you can use 10 and 12 inch records loaded in any order anywhere in the record magazine with automatic size selection by the mechanism. The M100A offered 100 selections, whereas this version holds 100 records for a total of 200 selections. This mechanism was offered as the Seeburg Industrial/Commercial Music (SICM) system housed in a huge steel cabinet as well as this home version as shown in the wooden console. This model includes the preamp, power amp, speaker and 24-hour timer which can be programmed to start and stop the music program numerous times over a 24-hour period. This one looks to be in complete and nice shape, too. I have no financial interest in this item, I just wanted it to find an appreciative buyer. Somebody here on this list should give it a good home. It's very rare to find one of these, never mind in this kind of good condition. Greg Bogantz ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] Seeburg Home Library
Hey guys, here's a rare opportunity to score one of the most unusual home phonographs ever made, the Seeburg Home Library: http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Seeberg-Automatic-Record-Console_W0QQitemZ260223421468QQihZ016QQcategoryZ3283QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem In case you don't know what it is, this is the first 78rpm version of the Seeburg Select-O-Matic record changer which was introduced as the M100A jukebox in 1948. It is full intermix - you can use 10 and 12 inch records loaded in any order anywhere in the record magazine with automatic size selection by the mechanism. The M100A offered 100 selections, whereas this version holds 100 records for a total of 200 selections. This mechanism was offered as the Seeburg Industrial/Commercial Music (SICM) system housed in a huge steel cabinet as well as this home version as shown in the wooden console. This model includes the preamp, power amp, speaker and 24-hour timer which can be programmed to start and stop the music program numerous times over a 24-hour period. This one looks to be in complete and nice shape, too. I have no financial interest in this item, I just wanted it to find an appreciative buyer. Somebody here on this list should give it a good home. It's very rare to find one of these, never mind in this kind of good condition. Greg Bogantz From taediso...@aol.com Sun Mar 30 15:17:18 2008 From: taediso...@aol.com (taediso...@aol.com) Date: Sun Mar 30 15:17:29 2008 Subject: [Phono-L] Fw: EARLIEST recorded human voice? Message-ID: cca.2ae52da2.35216...@aol.com In a message dated 3/30/2008 12:27:40 PM Pacific Daylight Time, allena...@aol.com writes: But who managed to extract the sound from this phonautographic tracing at the ENHS? Was it done at the Site (prior to Scott/Paris)? And what was the actual date in 1878 for the MERR? The scans were made by Jerry Fabris and David Giovannoni at the Edison Site late last October. The sound was recovered by Earl Cornell and Carl Haber at the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab at UC Berkeley, just like the Scott recordings. We started out with the Edison phonautograms because they were the most immediately accessible, and they quickly allowed Earl and Carl to determine how viable this project would be as well as how to go about reprogramming their existing equipment to work effectively with phonautograms. There are many more Edison phonautograms to be deciphered, but that particular project was put on hold when the Scott phonautograms came to light, thanks to Patrick Feaster's research. The short Edison sound file that has been recovered, and posted at firstsounds.org, was made on September 19, 1878, one of the last phonautograms Edison and Batchelor did for the MERR. Handwritten notations on the sheet indicate the points at which test (vocal) calibrations were made, and where the sound of the train begins and ends. When I first wrote about these phonautograms in my book Tinfoil Phonographs in 2001 I commented on how exciting it would be to hear the actual ambient street noise of a vanished New York if these could be played. Well, that was a bit overly optimistic, at least as regards this particular sheet. What we hear is not even the clicking and clacking of train wheels over the ties. It is probably the harmonic vibration of the braces and girders. Edison wrote about this in his notes on July 3, 1878: We find that the lattice girders some of which are weighted in middle acts as reeds and continue the vibration for a long time after the train has passed . . . We find that the diagonal cross rods vibrate strongly. Further work will be done on this recording as well as the remaining Edison phonautograms, and there's hope that more clarity can be extracted from the fog. It's very probable that other recordings may have recognizable sounds of a train passing over rails, as well as (we hope) recognizable human voices. This is just the beginning, we were under a tight deadline to have as much as possible in time for the already planned presentations at the ARSC conference last Friday. The existence of the Au Clair de la Lune recording was only discovered on Feburary 29th of this year, so you can see how little time there has been to pursue this. There will be much more to come, and hopefully more eureka moments. Best regards, Rene Rondeau **Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL Home. (http://home.aol.com/diy/home-improvement-eric-stromer?video=15ncid=aolhom000301) From allena...@aol.com Sun Mar 30 15:39:16 2008 From: allena...@aol.com (allena...@aol.com) Date: Sun Mar 30 15:39:33 2008 Subject: [Phono-L] Fw: EARLIEST recorded human voice?/thx Message-ID: cb6.27dea3d2.35217...@aol.com In a message dated 3/30/2008 6:19:38 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, taediso...@aol.com writes
[Phono-L] Researchers Play Tune Recorded Before Edison
The sound clip link, together with a clip from a 1931 recording of the same selection is available on this NY Times link already cited. Look for them on the left side of the page. Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Daniel Melvin d...@old-phonographs.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 3:37 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Researchers Play Tune Recorded Before Edison I thought one day someone would figure out how to do this. It's pretty cool. Has anyone found the link on the NY Times site with the sound clip? Dan On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 11:11 AM, Loran Hughes lo...@oldcrank.com wrote: http://tinyurl.com/36z5cj Loran ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
[Phono-L] Wurlitzer P-12
Doug, have you got a PAIR of Patricians? You're only the second guy I've heard of to own them. For those who don't know what these are, they were 4-way HUGE loudspeaker systems that employed a 30-inch! woofer in a corner-horn enclosure that was vastly efficient. My friend who had them in his basement could blow the windows out of the house with about 8 watts of audio per each. Needless to say, he liked to play pipe organ music. LOUD :o) Greg Bogantz - Original Message - From: Douglas Houston cdh...@earthlink.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 3:27 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Wurlitzer P-12 Thanks, Albert. I have one of those amplifiers, and I plan on re-capping it. I worked in a radio store when I was a kid, and they had a record counter. The audition amplifier was one of that model and, as you said, it sounded good. Speaking in general terms, frequency response in Juke boxes was strongly peaked in the low end. The customers loved it, and I'm sure that the restaurant owners had the treble turned all the way to full cut. Anyway, that amp will probably sound good with a preamp, such as a Fisher 80 nseries feeding it. I have a feeling that it's better than commonly thought. It's all about the transformers in it. Some time, immediately after the war, the Harmonicats did Peg Of My Heart on the VitaCoustic label. The record began with four notes, then a deep bass string. Whatever the jukebox in that place was, that bass note almost knocked stuff off the walls. It was in a neighborhood soda shop where us kids congregated. I played that selection lots of times. I do have the disc somewhere, and if I can find it, I'd like to play it on my E-V Patricians some time. It'll probably crack plaster! [Original Message] From: Albert cen...@comcast.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Date: 3/26/2008 1:24:49 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Wurlitzer P-12 No actually most WurliTzer amps after 1937 are painted red with the exception of the W-800 which was gold and the counter models which also were gold. Yes the P12 and the 412 used the gold amps with the 45 tubes. They really sound good considering the technology at the time. I had Jukebox Friday night restore the amp on my 412 and it is awsome. Funny you mentioned I had a mills for many years, I just loved watching the ferris wheel mech. I did however install an Astatic 51-2 cartridge and removed the weight from the head. It didnt look as good, but at least I was able to play my Rhino records (reproduction 78's) - Original Message - From: Douglas Houston cdh...@earthlink.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 7:13 AM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Wurlitzer P-12 Albert; Could you tell me which Wurlitzer box used the amplifier that had a 45 driving puish-pull 45's power amps? The chassis was painted gold (as probably all Wurlitzers were). I was was amused at your description of going through grooves like a plow. When I was a kid, one of my friends' family had a Mills DoReMi in their dining room. Rather unconventional place for it, but that's where it was. Now, talk about a record plow! The player had a Webster-Racine horseshoe magnetic pickup and the stylus pressure must have weighed in at pounds. Sure as shootin', I'd never have put any of my records on that thing. Lord, what a shellac grinder that thing was! But it had a really neat amplifier. Push-Pull 2A3's. [Original Message] From: Albert cen...@comcast.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Date: 3/25/2008 10:32:45 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Wurlitzer P-12 The P-12 is a great early Jukebox. The only thing you will need to do is lighten the tone arm and install a modern cartridge. This will enable you play your 78s without going through the grooves like a plow. If it has the original amplifier you will find it has a very smooth tone with great fidelity and volume. Subscribe to Always Jukin' There are hundreds of dealers and jukebox enthusiasts out there. It is my passion. I have 13 pre war Wurlitzers and well as Seeburgs and Rockolas. My best source for Parts is Musical fun for everyone Bill Butterfield in Napa California. Al Menashe - Original Message - From: Ken and Brenda Brekke kb...@charter.net To: 'Antique Phonograph List' phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 7:01 PM Subject: [Phono-L] Wurlitzer P-12 I recently was able to purchase a 1934 Wurlitzer P-12 jukebox. Can anyone on this list refer me to where I can purchase any service manuals or parts? Thanks in advance, Ken B. ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Free
