What happened to the Carolina phono show scheduled for March 15? Why was it cancelled? Ray From [email protected] Mon Feb 11 07:47:48 2008 From: [email protected] (Ron L) Date: Mon Feb 11 07:51:21 2008 Subject: [Phono-L] Portables In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> References: <[email protected]><024b01c868b7$77e72500$6500a...@your4dacd0ea75><[email protected]> <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
It looks like an earlier reproducer than what it should have had. That is an Orthophonic looking arm. Maybe the arm is wrong too? Ron L -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Robert Wright Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 1:17 AM To: Antique Phonograph List Subject: [Phono-L] Portables Here's another Carryola on eBay: http://cgi.ebay.com/VINTAGE-1920S-ORNATE-VIOLIN-CRANK-PHONOGRAPH-COOL_W0QQit emZ300197975631QQihZ020QQcategoryZ1442QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem My question is about the add-a-tone patent of 1925 referenced on the reproducer. It looks like a combination recorder/reproducer design from the late 1870's (figuratively, of course)! Surely this wasn't intended for home recordings. More likely, I assume, just another sound source for more volume. This typically wouldn't be conducive to pleasant playback (and certainly not accurate playback), as waves coming from the front side of the diaphragm (the side not facing the tonearm tube/horn) would be out of phase and time-misaligned with the waves coming from the horn, but maybe they thought the extended length of that overly-curvy tonearm would make the distance traveled by the waves coming out of the horn long enough that phase issues would no longer have a detrimental effect -- thus by amplifying the waves coming from the non-tonearm side of the diaphragm, they were "add"ing more "tone". Or was it just another way to establish a BS patent/avoid a Victor patent infringement? Thoughts? Best, Robert _______________________________________________ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.oldcrank.org
