Re: [Phono-L] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4)
As far as I know, Victor didn't make any 8-4's after 1927. Does this mean all of them would have this problem unless someone retrofitted them afterward? From: philip_ca...@pittsford.monroe.edu To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 03:25:33 + Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4) The other thing to look at is the date of the machine and the angle of the tone arm albow. Early Orthophonic machines had a tendency to wear records faster because the lateral thrust was incorrect. Victor fixed the problem in 1928 by offering a different elbow with a slightly wider arc as a retrofit; they're still around if you ask the right people. I fitted one to my 1927 Credenza. PC From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] on behalf of Ron L'Herault [lhera...@verizon.net] Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2014 10:36 PM To: 'Antique Phonograph List' Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4) The only thing you may want to really look at is the reproducer. If it is very swollen and cracked or has missing pieces, you probably won't be able to get it rebuilt. Then you'll have to either find a good on or a repro on ebay or buy an orthophonic portable and use that reproducer. Ron L -Original Message- From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] On Behalf Of Peter Fraser Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2014 9:17 PM To: Antique Phonograph List Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4) $200 is great unless it has horrible cosmetics and busted springs. Depends upon whether you want form, function, or both. You'll want a Peter Wall rebuild of the reproducer to realize the full acoustic potential, although some ortho reproducers are passable as-found. Bass on a credenza is better because the horn is larger, of course. Not louder or cleaner, just a little deeper. I had both for a while, side by side, and there's not all that much difference. You'll love the 8-4 after only having listened to pre-orthos. Go check it out and let us know what you find. Sent from my iPhone -- Peter pjfra...@mac.com On Mar 15, 2014, at 5:32 PM, richard_rubin richard_ru...@hotmail.com wrote: Thanks. Why do you suppose the bass response is better on the Credenza -- is the horn that much louder? Is it that noticeable? And what do you think the right price range would be? The guy seems to want $200; I doubt he'd go below $150. And I'm not sure what kind of work it might need... Sent from Samsung tablet Original message From: Peter Fraser pjfra...@mac.com Date:03/15/2014 7:50 PM (GMT-05:00) To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4) I had an 8-4; they sound great. They don't have the bass response that the credenza has, but they will certainly knock your socks off if you've never had an orthophonic before. Don't sweat the pot metal thing, if the price is right you should buy the machine and deal with the tonearm mount if you need to later. I tend to listen to period-appropriate records on each machine, and an orthophonic will certainly play up the deficiencies of acoustic recordings. But you can't go wrong with a big orthophonic like an 8-4! Sent from my iPhone -- Peter pjfra...@mac.com On Mar 15, 2014, at 4:02 PM, Richard richard_ru...@hotmail.com wrote: I've been offered a Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4), and I'm wondering what to do. I haven't seen it in person yet, so I don't know if it has any pot metal issues; does this particular model tend to develop those? And if so, where? Just the tone arm mount, or the tone arm itself? How about the reproducer? And just as important, how do these machines sound? I've never owned an orthophonic before (see other post) -- just earlier acoustic machines, and electric machines from the late 1920's on. Do acoustic records sound best on acoustic machines? And do later records (say, 1926 and later) sound better on orthophonic machines, or electric? I know this is a matter of personal preference, but I'd be very interested to hear your opinion. And does anyone out there own an actual VV 8-4? If so, how does it sound compared to, say, a Credenza, or a high-end Columbia Viva-Tonal? (I've seen the videos on YouTube, but it's hard to get a sense of how they actually sound that way.) If I want to add a n orthophonic to my collection at some point, would I be much better off with a Credenza or some comparable machine? And what would be a fair price for an 8-4 in decent condition, assuming it doesn't need any work? ___ 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] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4)
The phrase period appropriate is an interesting one. I've heard it said that the window for records to produce optimal sound on an oprthophonic machine is about 1925-1930; before that and their not orthophonic, after that and they were recorded for optimal reproduction with an electric pickup/speaker. Does that sound right to you, or not? From: pjfra...@mac.com Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 16:27:31 -0700 To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4) I had an 8-4; they sound great. They don't have the bass response that the credenza has, but they will certainly knock your socks off if you've never had an orthophonic before. Don't sweat the pot metal thing, if the price is right you should buy the machine and deal with the tonearm mount if you need to later. I tend to listen to period-appropriate records on each machine, and an orthophonic will certainly play up the deficiencies of acoustic recordings. But you can't go wrong with a big orthophonic like an 8-4! Sent from my iPhone -- Peter pjfra...@mac.com On Mar 15, 2014, at 4:02 PM, Richard richard_ru...@hotmail.com wrote: I've been offered a Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4), and I'm wondering what to do. I haven't seen it in person yet, so I don't know if it has any pot metal issues; does this particular model tend to develop those? And if so, where? Just the tone arm mount, or the tone arm itself? How about the reproducer? And just as important, how do these machines sound? I've never owned an orthophonic before (see other post) -- just earlier acoustic machines, and electric machines from the late 1920's on. Do acoustic records sound best on acoustic machines? And do later records (say, 1926 and later) sound better on orthophonic machines, or electric? I know this is a matter of personal preference, but I'd be very interested to hear your opinion. And does anyone out there own an actual VV 8-4? If so, how does it sound compared to, say, a Credenza, or a high-end Columbia Viva-Tonal? (I've seen the videos on YouTube, but it's hard to get a sense of how they actually sound that way.) If I want to add a n orthophonic to my collection at some point, would I be much better off with a Credenza or some comparable machine? And what would be a fair price for an 8-4 in decent condition, assuming it doesn't need any work? ___ 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] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4)
I wonder if the real difference with the Vivatonal is, as is the case with pre-orthophonic machines, in the reproducer. I've always liked the styling of Columbia machines better than Victors, but I own very few of the former because they just don't sound very good. It sounds, from what people are saying, that if I only have room for one orthophonic machine, I should probably just hold out for a Credenza -- that it represents the pinnacle of that particular technology. What do you think? And how much larger is the horn in a Credenza than the horn in an 8-4? From: lhera...@verizon.net To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 22:33:16 -0400 Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4) Bass response increases as the size of the Orthophonic horn increases. $150 to $200 is an excellent price range. It allows you to replace the back bracket if needs be and to rebuild the reproducer without feeling that the machine has become a money pit. I love the sound of Orthophonic records on both my Credenza and my amputee 8-4 (someone cut off the legs and added casters so that it would fit under the window in their house. It may make the bass sound even better that close to the floor). Other brands of electrically recorded records sound good too, especially the OKehs and Vivatonals. The Vivatonals don't even sound as nice on the mid size Vivatonal machine I have. Ron L -Original Message- From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] On Behalf Of richard_rubin Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2014 8:33 PM To: Antique Phonograph List Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4) Thanks. Why do you suppose the bass response is better on the Credenza -- is the horn that much louder? Is it that noticeable? And what do you think the right price range would be? The guy seems to want $200; I doubt he'd go below $150. And I'm not sure what kind of work it might need... Sent from Samsung tablet Original message From: Peter Fraser pjfra...@mac.com Date:03/15/2014 7:50 PM (GMT-05:00) To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4) I had an 8-4; they sound great. They don't have the bass response that the credenza has, but they will certainly knock your socks off if you've never had an orthophonic before. Don't sweat the pot metal thing, if the price is right you should buy the machine and deal with the tonearm mount if you need to later. I tend to listen to period-appropriate records on each machine, and an orthophonic will certainly play up the deficiencies of acoustic recordings. But you can't go wrong with a big orthophonic like an 8-4! Sent from my iPhone -- Peter pjfra...@mac.com On Mar 15, 2014, at 4:02 PM, Richard richard_ru...@hotmail.com wrote: I've been offered a Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4), and I'm wondering what to do. I haven't seen it in person yet, so I don't know if it has any pot metal issues; does this particular model tend to develop those? And if so, where? Just the tone arm mount, or the tone arm itself? How about the reproducer? And just as important, how do these machines sound? I've never owned an orthophonic before (see other post) -- just earlier acoustic machines, and electric machines from the late 1920's on. Do acoustic records sound best on acoustic machines? And do later records (say, 1926 and later) sound better on orthophonic machines, or electric? I know this is a matter of personal preference, but I'd be very interested to hear your opinion. And does anyone out there own an actual VV 8-4? If so, how does it sound compared to, say, a Credenza, or a high-end Columbia Viva-Tonal? (I've seen the videos on YouTube, but it's hard to get a sense of how they actually sound that way.) If I want to add a n orthophonic to my collection at some point, would I be much better off with a Credenza or some comparable machine? And what would be a fair price for an 8-4 in decent condition, assuming it doesn't need any work? ___ 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
[Phono-L] Can anyone identify this Sonora?
Can anyone tell me which model of Sonora phonograph this is? It looks to be one of their higher-end bombe machines, but I've always had trouble identifying particular Sonora models. If it is a higher-end machine, should I be surprised that it doesn't have a wooden tone arm? (Do those wooden tone arms really sound better, for that matter?) And am I the only one who's never seen a Sonora in oak before? It seems to me every one I've ever seen has been mahogany. Thoughts?Oh, and if anyone has one of these and would like to share photos of it, I'd appreciate it; I'm especially curious about what it's supposed to look like with the doors open. -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mystery sonora.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 31338 bytes Desc: not available URL: http://oldcrank.org/pipermail/phono-l/attachments/20140319/b6195a43/attachment.jpg ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Orthophonic vs. Electric?
Thanks, Bill. It sounds like there's definitely a go big or go home school when it comes to orthophonics. Since I probably only have room for one machine, I suspect many out there would advise me to hold out for a Credenza. Do you think most 80+ year-old orthophonic horns need to be re-sealed? Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 21:38:41 -0400 From: rochr...@gmail.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Orthophonic vs. Electric? For years I poo-pooed listening to electric records on an Orthophonic machine, always playing them instead on a modern turntable with a collector noise reduction unit. But I discovered that I had never heard a properly restored Orthophonic machine playing a Victor Orthophonic record. By properly restored I mean a Credenza that has had the horn resealed, the felt gasket between horn neck and tone arm replaced and sealed, and which used a good rebuilt Orthophonic reproducer. This type of machine plays magnificently! The warmth and depth of tone is wonderful. While dance records are great played on a restored Credenza, some of the 12 Victor Gems records offer the best way to hear the machine because you can hear wonderful voices, a full orchestra as well as great 1920s tunes. The same record played on a modern system does not have the same quality. Perhaps if I were an engineer or musician I could express more clearly what the difference is. But I have been converted. Since that first experience I have bought and restored my own Credenza and then later a 10-50 and a 9-40. I must say that in the 9-40, one has the chance of hearing an Orthophonic record played with both an Orthophonic reproducer and an early electric reproducer/amp, as the machine has one of each. While they both play through the biggest Orthophonic horn available from Victor, the Orthophonic reproducer sounds the best. All things being equal in this machine (restored acoustical as well as electric components), the early electric reproducer, amp, and WE designed driver doesn't match (IMHO) the tonal quality of the Orthophonic reproducer. These machines were the apex of acoustical playback. I continue to be amazed at how much air these machines can move. I must admit that I play the bulk of my collection on a modern turntable but I have a much smaller collection of 1920s electrically-recorded records that I play only on my big Orthophonic and/or early electric machines. If you have the room, buy a Cradenza and restore it. They haven't been as cheap as they are now in years. Regards, Bill Zucca On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 7:48 PM, George Glastris glast...@comcast.netwrote: Well, I for one am a HUGE fan of the 8-9. The sound is excellent, the machine has a great look to it (and beautifully blends in with my Arts Crafts furniture), and it's not so big as to take over the room. They don't have that 1920s walnut dining room look to them which looks out of place anywhere besides a 1920s movie set. I see them offered for around $800-1,500 at Union, but usually quite a bit less at auction. Also, they have a metal horn like the English Re-Entrant models which some believe gives a better sound. Besides, Victor told it's dealers that they would appeal to Americans of foreign extraction and owners of lunch rooms and confectioner shops so I guess my Grandfather George Dimpapas and my Grandfather Apostolos Glastris would have had them in their respective diners and candy shops in the 1920s. -Original Message- From: Richard Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2014 6:03 PM To: phono-l@oldcrank.org 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 ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org -- From The Hubbard House On the park in Rochester, Vermont where it's always
[Phono-L] Majestic model 181 radio/phonograph
I've recently been offered a Majestic model 181 radio/phonograph. Does anyone out there have any experience with these, and, if so, have any caveats? I know about the pot metal in the tuning condensers, and I know I'll have a serious problem if either of the 50 tubes are dead; but what about the phonograph? Does anyone know what kind of pickup it has? (And, for that matter, who made the phonograph?) Has anyone heard one, and, if so, how does it sound? And does anyone have any photos of one they'd care to share?Thanks! ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4)
It's a logical assumption. I believe that if I listen to something that was marketed at the same time as the device upon which I'm listening to it, I will have the most authentic experience. There are many others that don't agree with that and I'm certainly not intending to open the door to that discussion once again! There's just a certain whompiness to the bass that comes when you play Victor late 20s electrics on a big orthophonic machine, that doesn't seem to come any other way. Sent from my iPhone -- Peter pjfra...@mac.com On Mar 19, 2014, at 3:19 PM, Richard richard_ru...@hotmail.com wrote: The phrase period appropriate is an interesting one. I've heard it said that the window for records to produce optimal sound on an oprthophonic machine is about 1925-1930; before that and their not orthophonic, after that and they were recorded for optimal reproduction with an electric pickup/speaker. Does that sound right to you, or not? From: pjfra...@mac.com Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 16:27:31 -0700 To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4) I had an 8-4; they sound great. They don't have the bass response that the credenza has, but they will certainly knock your socks off if you've never had an orthophonic before. Don't sweat the pot metal thing, if the price is right you should buy the machine and deal with the tonearm mount if you need to later. I tend to listen to period-appropriate records on each machine, and an orthophonic will certainly play up the deficiencies of acoustic recordings. But you can't go wrong with a big orthophonic like an 8-4! Sent from my iPhone -- Peter pjfra...@mac.com On Mar 15, 2014, at 4:02 PM, Richard richard_ru...@hotmail.com wrote: I've been offered a Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4), and I'm wondering what to do. I haven't seen it in person yet, so I don't know if it has any pot metal issues; does this particular model tend to develop those? And if so, where? Just the tone arm mount, or the tone arm itself? How about the reproducer? And just as important, how do these machines sound? I've never owned an orthophonic before (see other post) -- just earlier acoustic machines, and electric machines from the late 1920's on. Do acoustic records sound best on acoustic machines? And do later records (say, 1926 and later) sound better on orthophonic machines, or electric? I know this is a matter of personal preference, but I'd be very interested to hear your opinion. And does anyone out there own an actual VV 8-4? If so, how does it sound compared to, say, a Credenza, or a high-end Columbia Viva-Tonal? (I've seen the videos on YouTube, but it's hard to get a sense of how they actually sound that way.) If I want to add a n orthophonic to my collection at some point, would I be much better off with a Credenza or some comparable machine? And what would be a fair price for an 8-4 in decent condition, assuming it doesn't need any work? ___ 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] Can anyone identify this Sonora?
I have that same machine in oak. I don't have my catalog handy, but I think it's an Elite, the fourth one down from the Invincible(the highest). My fittings are nickel plated. I can't tell by yours if the hardware is nickel or gold. Sonora Bombe style machines are scarce in Oak. There is a picture of one on the cover of Discovering Antique Phonographs by Tim Fabrizio and George Paul. Harvey Kravitz On Wednesday, March 19, 2014 4:16 PM, Richard richard_ru...@hotmail.com wrote: Can anyone tell me which model of Sonora phonograph this is? It looks to be one of their higher-end bombe machines, but I've always had trouble identifying particular Sonora models. If it is a higher-end machine, should I be surprised that it doesn't have a wooden tone arm? (Do those wooden tone arms really sound better, for that matter?) And am I the only one who's never seen a Sonora in oak before? It seems to me every one I've ever seen has been mahogany. Thoughts?Oh, and if anyone has one of these and would like to share photos of it, I'd appreciate it; I'm especially curious about what it's supposed to look like with the doors open. -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mystery sonora.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 31338 bytes Desc: not available URL: http://oldcrank.org/pipermail/phono-l/attachments/20140319/b6195a43/attachment.jpg ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Orthophonic vs. Electric?
At that cheap price, just get the 8-4. Who knows when a credenza will turn up locally? It's better to be able to enjoy it now, and then improve it when you have a chance. Sent from my iPhone -- Peter pjfra...@mac.com On Mar 19, 2014, at 3:35 PM, Richard richard_ru...@hotmail.com wrote: Thanks, Bill. It sounds like there's definitely a go big or go home school when it comes to orthophonics. Since I probably only have room for one machine, I suspect many out there would advise me to hold out for a Credenza. Do you think most 80+ year-old orthophonic horns need to be re-sealed? Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 21:38:41 -0400 From: rochr...@gmail.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Orthophonic vs. Electric? For years I poo-pooed listening to electric records on an Orthophonic machine, always playing them instead on a modern turntable with a collector noise reduction unit. But I discovered that I had never heard a properly restored Orthophonic machine playing a Victor Orthophonic record. By properly restored I mean a Credenza that has had the horn resealed, the felt gasket between horn neck and tone arm replaced and sealed, and which used a good rebuilt Orthophonic reproducer. This type of machine plays magnificently! The warmth and depth of tone is wonderful. While dance records are great played on a restored Credenza, some of the 12 Victor Gems records offer the best way to hear the machine because you can hear wonderful voices, a full orchestra as well as great 1920s tunes. The same record played on a modern system does not have the same quality. Perhaps if I were an engineer or musician I could express more clearly what the difference is. But I have been converted. Since that first experience I have bought and restored my own Credenza and then later a 10-50 and a 9-40. I must say that in the 9-40, one has the chance of hearing an Orthophonic record played with both an Orthophonic reproducer and an early electric reproducer/amp, as the machine has one of each. While they both play through the biggest Orthophonic horn available from Victor, the Orthophonic reproducer sounds the best. All things being equal in this machine (restored acoustical as well as electric components), the early electric reproducer, amp, and WE designed driver doesn't match (IMHO) the tonal quality of the Orthophonic reproducer. These machines were the apex of acoustical playback. I continue to be amazed at how much air these machines can move. I must admit that I play the bulk of my collection on a modern turntable but I have a much smaller collection of 1920s electrically-recorded records that I play only on my big Orthophonic and/or early electric machines. If you have the room, buy a Cradenza and restore it. They haven't been as cheap as they are now in years. Regards, Bill Zucca On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 7:48 PM, George Glastris glast...@comcast.netwrote: Well, I for one am a HUGE fan of the 8-9. The sound is excellent, the machine has a great look to it (and beautifully blends in with my Arts Crafts furniture), and it's not so big as to take over the room. They don't have that 1920s walnut dining room look to them which looks out of place anywhere besides a 1920s movie set. I see them offered for around $800-1,500 at Union, but usually quite a bit less at auction. Also, they have a metal horn like the English Re-Entrant models which some believe gives a better sound. Besides, Victor told it's dealers that they would appeal to Americans of foreign extraction and owners of lunch rooms and confectioner shops so I guess my Grandfather George Dimpapas and my Grandfather Apostolos Glastris would have had them in their respective diners and candy shops in the 1920s. -Original Message- From: Richard Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2014 6:03 PM To: phono-l@oldcrank.org 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?
Re: [Phono-L] Can anyone identify this Sonora?
I think this is the Grand..at least the grill looks like the grill on the Grand from a Catalogue that I have. So it's the third one down after the Supreme and Invincible. Stan Stanford -Original Message- From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] On Behalf Of Richard Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 3:29 PM To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: [Phono-L] Can anyone identify this Sonora? Can anyone tell me which model of Sonora phonograph this is? It looks to be one of their higher-end bombe machines, but I've always had trouble identifying particular Sonora models. If it is a higher-end machine, should I be surprised that it doesn't have a wooden tone arm? (Do those wooden tone arms really sound better, for that matter?) And am I the only one who's never seen a Sonora in oak before? It seems to me every one I've ever seen has been mahogany. Thoughts?Oh, and if anyone has one of these and would like to share photos of it, I'd appreciate it; I'm especially curious about what it's supposed to look like with the doors open. -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mystery sonora.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 31338 bytes Desc: not available URL: http://oldcrank.org/pipermail/phono-l/attachments/20140319/b6195a43/attachm ent.jpg ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4)
The Vivatonal machines did not have the great horn design that Victor had. The reproducers are close, but if memory serves a bit heavier than the Orthos. The Columbia diaphragm is not as pleated as the Victor diaphragm and the needle bar bearings are less complicated but they work very well, especially after you clean and lube the Vivatonal bearings. Doing that and regreasing (improves the seal) the bottom bearing area of the tone arm made the most difference in the Vivatonal sound. The Credenza horn is taller but about as wide, I think. A good compromise might be an 8-12. Ron L -Original Message- From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] On Behalf Of Richard Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 6:23 PM To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4) I wonder if the real difference with the Vivatonal is, as is the case with pre-orthophonic machines, in the reproducer. I've always liked the styling of Columbia machines better than Victors, but I own very few of the former because they just don't sound very good. It sounds, from what people are saying, that if I only have room for one orthophonic machine, I should probably just hold out for a Credenza -- that it represents the pinnacle of that particular technology. What do you think? And how much larger is the horn in a Credenza than the horn in an 8-4? From: lhera...@verizon.net To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 22:33:16 -0400 Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4) Bass response increases as the size of the Orthophonic horn increases. $150 to $200 is an excellent price range. It allows you to replace the back bracket if needs be and to rebuild the reproducer without feeling that the machine has become a money pit. I love the sound of Orthophonic records on both my Credenza and my amputee 8-4 (someone cut off the legs and added casters so that it would fit under the window in their house. It may make the bass sound even better that close to the floor). Other brands of electrically recorded records sound good too, especially the OKehs and Vivatonals. The Vivatonals don't even sound as nice on the mid size Vivatonal machine I have. Ron L -Original Message- From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] On Behalf Of richard_rubin Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2014 8:33 PM To: Antique Phonograph List Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4) Thanks. Why do you suppose the bass response is better on the Credenza -- is the horn that much louder? Is it that noticeable? And what do you think the right price range would be? The guy seems to want $200; I doubt he'd go below $150. And I'm not sure what kind of work it might need... Sent from Samsung tablet Original message From: Peter Fraser pjfra...@mac.com Date:03/15/2014 7:50 PM (GMT-05:00) To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4) I had an 8-4; they sound great. They don't have the bass response that the credenza has, but they will certainly knock your socks off if you've never had an orthophonic before. Don't sweat the pot metal thing, if the price is right you should buy the machine and deal with the tonearm mount if you need to later. I tend to listen to period-appropriate records on each machine, and an orthophonic will certainly play up the deficiencies of acoustic recordings. But you can't go wrong with a big orthophonic like an 8-4! Sent from my iPhone -- Peter pjfra...@mac.com On Mar 15, 2014, at 4:02 PM, Richard richard_ru...@hotmail.com wrote: I've been offered a Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4), and I'm wondering what to do. I haven't seen it in person yet, so I don't know if it has any pot metal issues; does this particular model tend to develop those? And if so, where? Just the tone arm mount, or the tone arm itself? How about the reproducer? And just as important, how do these machines sound? I've never owned an orthophonic before (see other post) -- just earlier acoustic machines, and electric machines from the late 1920's on. Do acoustic records sound best on acoustic machines? And do later records (say, 1926 and later) sound better on orthophonic machines, or electric? I know this is a matter of personal preference, but I'd be very interested to hear your opinion. And does anyone out there own an actual VV 8-4? If so, how does it sound compared to, say, a Credenza, or a high-end Columbia Viva-Tonal? (I've seen the videos on YouTube, but it's hard to get a sense of how they actually sound that way.) If I want to add a n orthophonic to my collection at some point, would I be much better off with a Credenza or some comparable machine? And what would be a fair price for an 8-4 in decent condition, assuming it doesn't need any work? ___
Re: [Phono-L] Can anyone identify this Sonora?
Thanks, Stan. I have a mahogany Sonora Elite, with a wooden tone arm. Would that model have been a level (or two) below this one, then? From: s...@clarphon.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 17:48:24 -0700 Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Can anyone identify this Sonora? I think this is the Grand..at least the grill looks like the grill on the Grand from a Catalogue that I have. So it's the third one down after the Supreme and Invincible. Stan Stanford -Original Message- From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] On Behalf Of Richard Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 3:29 PM To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: [Phono-L] Can anyone identify this Sonora? Can anyone tell me which model of Sonora phonograph this is? It looks to be one of their higher-end bombe machines, but I've always had trouble identifying particular Sonora models. If it is a higher-end machine, should I be surprised that it doesn't have a wooden tone arm? (Do those wooden tone arms really sound better, for that matter?) And am I the only one who's never seen a Sonora in oak before? It seems to me every one I've ever seen has been mahogany. Thoughts?Oh, and if anyone has one of these and would like to share photos of it, I'd appreciate it; I'm especially curious about what it's supposed to look like with the doors open. -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mystery sonora.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 31338 bytes Desc: not available URL: http://oldcrank.org/pipermail/phono-l/attachments/20140319/b6195a43/attachm ent.jpg ___ 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] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4)
They all would have had the same issue. Robert Baumbach used to have original replacement goosenecks and would sell them along with a reproduction of the circular sent to Victor dealers; he may still have a few, though I bought mine nearly three years ago. The 8-4's tonearm gooseneck, like all early Orthophonics, would have been pretty much a perfect U. Bending the U slightly outwards (almost like crossing a U with a V) compensated for tracking error and reduced record wear considerably. PC From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] on behalf of Richard [richard_ru...@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 6:13 PM To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4) As far as I know, Victor didn't make any 8-4's after 1927. Does this mean all of them would have this problem unless someone retrofitted them afterward? From: philip_ca...@pittsford.monroe.edu To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 03:25:33 + Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4) The other thing to look at is the date of the machine and the angle of the tone arm albow. Early Orthophonic machines had a tendency to wear records faster because the lateral thrust was incorrect. Victor fixed the problem in 1928 by offering a different elbow with a slightly wider arc as a retrofit; they're still around if you ask the right people. I fitted one to my 1927 Credenza. PC From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] on behalf of Ron L'Herault [lhera...@verizon.net] Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2014 10:36 PM To: 'Antique Phonograph List' Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4) The only thing you may want to really look at is the reproducer. If it is very swollen and cracked or has missing pieces, you probably won't be able to get it rebuilt. Then you'll have to either find a good on or a repro on ebay or buy an orthophonic portable and use that reproducer. Ron L -Original Message- From: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] On Behalf Of Peter Fraser Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2014 9:17 PM To: Antique Phonograph List Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4) $200 is great unless it has horrible cosmetics and busted springs. Depends upon whether you want form, function, or both. You'll want a Peter Wall rebuild of the reproducer to realize the full acoustic potential, although some ortho reproducers are passable as-found. Bass on a credenza is better because the horn is larger, of course. Not louder or cleaner, just a little deeper. I had both for a while, side by side, and there's not all that much difference. You'll love the 8-4 after only having listened to pre-orthos. Go check it out and let us know what you find. Sent from my iPhone -- Peter pjfra...@mac.com On Mar 15, 2014, at 5:32 PM, richard_rubin richard_ru...@hotmail.com wrote: Thanks. Why do you suppose the bass response is better on the Credenza -- is the horn that much louder? Is it that noticeable? And what do you think the right price range would be? The guy seems to want $200; I doubt he'd go below $150. And I'm not sure what kind of work it might need... Sent from Samsung tablet Original message From: Peter Fraser pjfra...@mac.com Date:03/15/2014 7:50 PM (GMT-05:00) To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4) I had an 8-4; they sound great. They don't have the bass response that the credenza has, but they will certainly knock your socks off if you've never had an orthophonic before. Don't sweat the pot metal thing, if the price is right you should buy the machine and deal with the tonearm mount if you need to later. I tend to listen to period-appropriate records on each machine, and an orthophonic will certainly play up the deficiencies of acoustic recordings. But you can't go wrong with a big orthophonic like an 8-4! Sent from my iPhone -- Peter pjfra...@mac.com On Mar 15, 2014, at 4:02 PM, Richard richard_ru...@hotmail.com wrote: I've been offered a Victrola 8-4 (VV 8-4), and I'm wondering what to do. I haven't seen it in person yet, so I don't know if it has any pot metal issues; does this particular model tend to develop those? And if so, where? Just the tone arm mount, or the tone arm itself? How about the reproducer? And just as important, how do these machines sound? I've never owned an orthophonic before (see other post) -- just earlier acoustic machines, and electric machines from the late 1920's on. Do acoustic records sound best on acoustic machines? And do later records (say, 1926 and later) sound better on orthophonic machines, or electric? I know this is a matter of personal preference, but I'd be very interested to hear your opinion. And does anyone out
Re: [Phono-L] Can anyone identify this Sonora?
The ones on this one look to be gold-plated. I wonder why oak is so uncommon on these machines -- was it just out of style at that point? I assume these are all post-WWI machines. Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 16:37:03 -0700 From: harveykrav...@yahoo.com To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Can anyone identify this Sonora? I have that same machine in oak. I don't have my catalog handy, but I think it's an Elite, the fourth one down from the Invincible(the highest). My fittings are nickel plated. I can't tell by yours if the hardware is nickel or gold. Sonora Bombe style machines are scarce in Oak. There is a picture of one on the cover of Discovering Antique Phonographs by Tim Fabrizio and George Paul. Harvey Kravitz On Wednesday, March 19, 2014 4:16 PM, Richard richard_ru...@hotmail.com wrote: Can anyone tell me which model of Sonora phonograph this is? It looks to be one of their higher-end bombe machines, but I've always had trouble identifying particular Sonora models. If it is a higher-end machine, should I be surprised that it doesn't have a wooden tone arm? (Do those wooden tone arms really sound better, for that matter?) And am I the only one who's never seen a Sonora in oak before? It seems to me every one I've ever seen has been mahogany. Thoughts?Oh, and if anyone has one of these and would like to share photos of it, I'd appreciate it; I'm especially curious about what it's supposed to look like with the doors open. -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mystery sonora.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 31338 bytes Desc: not available URL: http://oldcrank.org/pipermail/phono-l/attachments/20140319/b6195a43/attachment.jpg ___ 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] Can anyone identify this Sonora?
Just for the heck of it, pull out the bottom draw flip it over and look on the bottom. sometimes you will see the Model of the Machine stamped on the bottom, Mine is stamped Elite. Good Luck. Bruce - Original Message - From: harvey kravitz harveykrav...@yahoo.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 7:37:03 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Can anyone identify this Sonora? I have that same machine in oak. I don't have my catalog handy, but I think it's an Elite, the fourth one down from the Invincible(the highest). My fittings are nickel plated. I can't tell by yours if the hardware is nickel or gold. Sonora Bombe style machines are scarce in Oak. There is a picture of one on the cover of Discovering Antique Phonographs by Tim Fabrizio and George Paul. Harvey Kravitz On Wednesday, March 19, 2014 4:16 PM, Richard richard_ru...@hotmail.com wrote: Can anyone tell me which model of Sonora phonograph this is? It looks to be one of their higher-end bombe machines, but I've always had trouble identifying particular Sonora models. If it is a higher-end machine, should I be surprised that it doesn't have a wooden tone arm? (Do those wooden tone arms really sound better, for that matter?) And am I the only one who's never seen a Sonora in oak before? It seems to me every one I've ever seen has been mahogany. Thoughts?Oh, and if anyone has one of these and would like to share photos of it, I'd appreciate it; I'm especially curious about what it's supposed to look like with the doors open. -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mystery sonora.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 31338 bytes Desc: not available URL: http://oldcrank.org/pipermail/phono-l/attachments/20140319/b6195a43/attachment.jpg ___ 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] Can anyone identify this Sonora?
It's a Grand. They cost $250 in golden, fumed, early english, or mission oak, brown mahogany, or mahogany. 24w x 51h x 24d. It's the lesser of the top three. The others were the Invincible I ($375) and II ($500, because it had the wood tonearm added) and the Supreme - a fugly monster which was $1000, including a matching record cabinet. Bombe cabinet models below it were the Elite and the Baby Grand. Sent from my iPhone -- Peter pjfra...@mac.com On Mar 19, 2014, at 3:28 PM, Richard richard_ru...@hotmail.com wrote: Can anyone tell me which model of Sonora phonograph this is? It looks to be one of their higher-end bombe machines, but I've always had trouble identifying particular Sonora models. If it is a higher-end machine, should I be surprised that it doesn't have a wooden tone arm? (Do those wooden tone arms really sound better, for that matter?) And am I the only one who's never seen a Sonora in oak before? It seems to me every one I've ever seen has been mahogany. Thoughts?Oh, and if anyone has one of these and would like to share photos of it, I'd appreciate it; I'm especially curious about what it's supposed to look like with the doors open. -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mystery sonora.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 31338 bytes Desc: not available URL: http://oldcrank.org/pipermail/phono-l/attachments/20140319/b6195a43/attachment.jpg ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
Re: [Phono-L] Can anyone identify this Sonora?
This is a Sonora Grand (third from top of the line --- first the Supreme, followed by the Invincible, then the Grand). No, you should not be surprised by the metal tonearm. All Supremes do have wooden tonearms as far as I know, but not all Grands or Invincibles have them --- some had metal tonearms. Examples of high-end Sonoras in oak are harder to come by than the more common mahogany ones. I have never seen an oak Sonora with an oak tonearm, although they were supposedly available according to Sonora machine catalogs. I have asked some of the biggest collectors/dealers in the country about the existence of oak Sonora tonearms --- none have ever actually seen an oak Sonora tonearm. I can send more pics of machines if needed. Regards, Bob On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Richard richard_ru...@hotmail.com wrote: Can anyone tell me which model of Sonora phonograph this is? It looks to be one of their higher-end bombe machines, but I've always had trouble identifying particular Sonora models. If it is a higher-end machine, should I be surprised that it doesn't have a wooden tone arm? (Do those wooden tone arms really sound better, for that matter?) And am I the only one who's never seen a Sonora in oak before? It seems to me every one I've ever seen has been mahogany. Thoughts?Oh, and if anyone has one of these and would like to share photos of it, I'd appreciate it; I'm especially curious about what it's supposed to look like with the doors open. -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mystery sonora.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 31338 bytes Desc: not available URL: http://oldcrank.org/pipermail/phono-l/attachments/20140319/b6195a43/attachment.jpg ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 001206-006 GRAND.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 39787 bytes Desc: not available URL: http://oldcrank.org/pipermail/phono-l/attachments/20140319/45117266/attachment.jpg -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 010311-012 INVINCIBLE.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 86905 bytes Desc: not available URL: http://oldcrank.org/pipermail/phono-l/attachments/20140319/45117266/attachment-0001.jpg ___ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
