Dear Mr. Wright:
I have a Pathe Actuelle which use a paper cone drive by a mechanical
connection to the playback stylus, not as directly as the diffuser you
mention.
Very pure sound but definitely mid-rage only, the mass of the linkage
eliminating higher frequencys & since there is no baffle to the cone,
the lower frequencys are weakened by the air moved by the back of the cone,
out of phase with that moved by the front of the cone cancelling it.
If there had been some way to provide a baffle for the cone, the low
frequency responce would have been far better.
Very truly
yours,
Immortal
Performances
jimcip at earthlink.net
EarthLink Revolves Around You.
> [Original Message]
> From: Robert Wright <esroberto at hotmail.com>
> To: Antique Phonograph List <phono-l at oldcrank.org>
> Date: 03-Nov-2008 5:57:19 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" <edisonphonoworks at 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
