I could be wrong but my very first impression was that the machine was put together from original parts to make a complete machine as so many Edisons are currently. I base my opinion on the following: I have seen many Ds retrofitted during the period with a cygnet horn but never the D2 going back to the straight horn Edison was abandoning at the time. The whole purpose of stamping a 2 after the D on some Edison models was to denote the added cygnet horn. Of note are those items known to not be factory original to the machine. The crank, reproducer, crane, and reproducer carriage do not appear to be highlighted oxidized bronze (HOB) so they are not original to the machine. In any case the Model O reproducer would have been introduced with the later Idelia E. I am not all that convinced the HOB of the machine is original as it varies from patterns on machines I have observed and owned. Some of the bright spots look more like they were buffed out in irregular shapes rather than what the originals were. My gut feeling, for what little it is worth, is that this was a very old conglomeration of parts rather than something that left the factory as one machine. Of course only a close up inspection could discern many of the questions I have in mind. I would like to take a close look at the horn decal and the tiny areas where paint had chipped off. I would like to examine the underside of the bedplate. I would like to have looked into the cabinet all around. Unfortunately these are things that photos on eBay normally do not do. There was a guy back in 1968 who put Idelias "together" using Triumph parts. The bedplates were cast iron from an original and came out near perfect. He had a trophy company acid etch mill both the Idelia patent plate and the Edison script signature in brass plate. Seems the cabinets were the easiest part to reproduce with hardware from Constantine's as original. A collector at the time was paying $125 for a Triumph and $500 for an Idelia so there was motive. Also, at the time many of the collectors and dealers did not consider such a Triumph "conversion" to be wrong. It was "an improvement!" Lastly, since the Idelia machines were made up one at a time the D2 stamp on the patent plate would have been accurate IMHO and that machine should have had a cygnet horn. The whole machine and horn would have been packaged together and shipped as a special order. Best Wishes to All, Al
**************Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL Music. (http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?NCID=aolcmp003000000025 48) From [email protected] Tue Feb 5 16:22:33 2008 From: [email protected] (Daniel Melvin) Date: Tue Feb 5 16:23:17 2008 Subject: [Phono-L] Any Interest in an Edison Idealia In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> I agree with Mike. It is a stunning machine worthy of any collection. Idelieas are out of my league at least right now. Brice has good stuff. I hope someone give his stunner a new home. Dan On Feb 5, 2008 12:52 PM, Mike Stitt <[email protected]> wrote: > I have seen this machine and it is nice. The spruce horn is in fact > stunning! > Mike aka oldcranky > > I would buy it but as refinancing the house under present conditions can > be > brutal. lol > > > On Feb 5, 2008 11:45 AM, brice paris <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I decided a month or so ago to part with my Edison Idealia. I offerd it > > to some of my close phongraph friends, but have had no takers. I have > now > > decided to offer it to the list before I ebay it or??? > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Phono-L mailing list > http://phono-l.oldcrank.org > From [email protected] Tue Feb 5 16:26:06 2008 From: [email protected] ([email protected]) Date: Tue Feb 5 16:32:16 2008 Subject: [Phono-L] Re: Edison Triumph F Message-ID: <[email protected]> Greetings Stephen: Congratulations on this rare acquisition. I would be very interested in finding out the serial number of the O reproducer and if it is the iron body brass topped variety. I am curious if Edison really changed over to the potmetal body O on the Triumphs. With your machine having such provenance the O is most likely original. Only about 500 Triumphs were made after yours so it is a really good buy and rare in its own way. Again, congratulations on getting it! Regards, Al **************Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL Music. (http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?NCID=aolcmp003000000025 48) From [email protected] Tue Feb 5 16:41:26 2008 From: [email protected] (Robert Wright) Date: Tue Feb 5 16:42:19 2008 Subject: [Phono-L] Portable phonos References: <000601c86819$e97a0be0$0200a...@office><[email protected]><[email protected]> <003d01c86849$a75cd780$6400a...@hpa1514n> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Hi Greg, I agree, the bottom does sound like a typical Viva-Tonal though a modern cartridge; I had read elsewhere that these machines were capable of stunning amounts of bottom end extension for portables, but I didn't think it would be as big a difference as what this clip shows. Too bad the gent makes it clear it's his recording of his machine; hate to see dishonesty and misinformation continuing to spread. Nonetheless, Greg, what are your experiences with the Columbia #15? In terms of playing early electrical discs, namely Viva-Tonals and VE's, by acoustic reproduction, what non-Credenza machines have you heard that stand up to the Credenza? If we're talking about highest fidelity of an electrical disc through an acoustic machine, is there a clear winner in your opinion? I'd also like to ask you about your experiments with reproducers that garnered better fidelity than any standard-issue sound-boxes. It may be of interest to some of the List (I'd like Walt's input as well, and Steve M's), so if we promise to keep it short and simple, I hope we can discuss it here in the forum. Best, Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Bogantz" <[email protected]> To: "Antique Phonograph List" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 4:51 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Portable phonos > Hi Robert, Thanks for your confidence, but I don't have personal > experience with this machine. It is a Columbia 161 and uses what appears > to be the #15 Viva-Tonal reproducer. I'm sure it probably sounds better > than other, earlier portables, but I sincerely doubt that the audio clip > that you reference was actually recorded from this machine. That clip has > all the characteristics of a playback with a modern hifi phono cartridge. > In particular, there is no midrange peakiness which is still > characteristic of all acoustic reproducers that I know of. And the bass > is far more extended than I've heard come from any acoustic reproducer > played thru a horn, including the biggest exponential horns. Even if the > recording was made by sticking the microphone well down inside the horn of > an acoustic player, I don't thing the bass would be this good and the > midrange would certainly be honkier than what we hear in this clip. I've > been wrong plenty of times, but I still doubt that this recording was made > from this machine. > > Greg Bogantz > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert Wright" <[email protected]> > To: "Antique Phonograph List" <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 4:03 PM > Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Herzog Peg Layout > > >> Only rule I can think of is never trust the original handle! I've always >> liked the Victor Orthophonic suitcase models, but there's a Columbia >> Viva-Tonal model out there that sounds almost hi-fi, like a Credenza. >> Anyone know which one I'm talking about? Here's a pic: >> >> http://pagesperso-orange.fr/jlf/pho/18.jpg >> >> And here's the page associated with the pic, with a sound clip of it >> playing. >> >> http://pagesperso-orange.fr/jlf/enphonos.htm >> >> I don't know how this gent mic'd the phono or anything, but the bottom >> end on this machine appears to be pretty amazing. Where's Greg Bogantz? >> I bet he knows about this machine. >> >> Best, >> Robert >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Thatcher Graham" <[email protected]> >> To: "Antique Phonograph List" <[email protected]> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 1:48 PM >> Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Herzog Peg Layout >> >> >>> And while I'm tapping the great knowledge bank that is the phonolist, >>> are there any basic rules of thumb be applied to buying a portable >>> phonograph? What types of problems are common/endemic to certain models? >>> What's impossible to repair and should be inspected before purchase? >>> What's a generally good make/model? etc >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> [email protected] >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >
