It's interesting to note that when I sold stereo equipment Wharfdale speakers that I sold and still have were made from wood pannels filled with sand-of all the speakers we sold they had the sweetest sound-and are still being made today and shipped to th US from England.
Abe Feder On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 4:00 PM, Greg Bogantz <gbogantz1 at charter.net> wrote: > 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_noreen at 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 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] Resea > > rch: 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 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 > > > superb....looks 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 list > > http://phono-l.oldcrank.org > > _______________________________________________ > Phono-L mailing list > http://phono-l.oldcrank.org >
