You know, what so much of this shows is how well designed the diamond disk machine really was right from it's very beginning. If you have a good diaphragm in a diamond disk machine they really do a a good job of reproducing the music. Edison did experiment with aluminum diaphragms and even did some experimenting with larger horns and all of that, but it really didn't improve things all that much. It does sound a lot better than I would have expected with one of those Brunswick reproducers!
I was fascinated by your experiment. I have always felt that one of the shortcomings of Edison's later machines was that there was no easy way get a bigger horn on anything. With some spare time and some homemade crane parts, I put a big 12 panel cygnet horn on an Amberola 30, and it sounded great. I did the same thing with a big horn on a Gem!. You can play a Diamond Disc on a modern turntable and amplifier only to realize that the sound put into the record was always greater than the machine's ability to reproduce.
Hello to Reading! glad you found my videos, I have been enjoying yours. I shall put a video of a straight soundbox playing Edisons soon. Stay posted. Cheers from San Francisco.
That is an amazing piece of equipment All I done was turn my needle on my british made 78 turn table sideways a little and i could hear the tune so I new there was music on the disk,It was not clear at all so I took the entire arm off and tryied that no better so i taped the arm on and put it sideways and i could hear the tune a little louder,was not clear,but it worked a little.So i put my stereo back together and looked on enternet 4 the two records i have and found u all Thanks 4 bein there.
Oh Moo, there is a special place in Edison Hell for people playing DDs with the Ultona, I know. As you probably know from playing DDs on a modern turntable, the bass can be all over the place, but usually they seem to emphasize the mid-range and treble with rather subdued bass, even when compared to acoustic Victrola records. Cheers,
Kudos for taking the time and trouble to produce the result heard here. FASCINATING! While I have a Brunswick with the Ultona, I've only ever played a Diamond Disc once with it. As you note, there is some degree of damage with each and every playing. Your commentary is very informative. Thanks again for your obvious efforts. FIVE STARS!
Remarkable machine, the surface noise doesn't bother and indeed the bass sound is increased. congratulations and thanks for shearing! Ida is a beautiful song!
I have a Columbia that has a similar set up on the part where you put the needles I have one that has three different tips one's a diamond till turn it sideways rotates has two different needles it has a wonderful sound to it
@earlnut Not quite my impression - and I heard them in person. First - my point of reference was the Edisonic, not the Edison DD phonograph. There is quite a difference between the two, and Theodore Edison realized that a bigger horn gives better sound. Then, the new set up gives you a much better treble clarity - Edison diaphragms are rather muffled ("mellow in E's parlance). Edison DDs are low volume and have weak bass, so yes for what Edison discs are the Edison Phonograph is adequate.
interesting-years ago waltrip made me an adfaptor to play Pathe (vertical ) on ortho--damamged and gone but much like this idea... really neat video max
I hear these arguments a lot, but believe me when I say that the Edisonic Beethoven (arguably the loudest Edison DD machine with the widest frequency range ) produced a strong and pleasing sound, but could not even get close to the orthophonic Credenza next to it when it came to impact, fidelity and loudness. For comparison, play any G&T record of De Lucia and Huguet or the Original Dixiend Jazz Band's Tiger rag on a Victor Credenza next to your best Edison machine, and you will see my point.
Yes and no - Pathe was the first one to use sapphire style on records in 1905, but Edison used sapphire styli on cylinders back in the 1890s. Steel needles on shellac records was a perfectly fine solution. Edison's incompatible Diamond Disc machine of 1912 played records with very high pressure, so that he needed a diamond stylus, but also records made from hard bakelite to withstand the diamond. Diamonds are fiddly and can break or chip if you are not careful.
Reminds me, I watched Michael Fremer setting up a hugely expensive record deck on UA-cam; talk about fiddly! I've set up a deck myself, but not to that degree. To get the best out of records it is always fiddly, and then there is the static & dust! In the UK we had the Dust Bug but I imagine there were many earlier similar "solutions".
Oh Sanfran, you'll go to phono hell over this one! Bless your heart for all the time you put in this excellent experiment. So, how many DD will fit on the Changer? LOL From a guess before you played a DDI would have thought the bass would have been more enhanced over treble...
@merrihew Yep, it's smoother and has more definition. Also, the recording is much more spatial. Small bass increase. For all extents and purposes, the Edisonic Beethoven does a job that's very close. Replaced the spider - needed it for another project, and replaced it with a stiffened cone. Same difference, possibly the cone is stiffer and gives you a little more treble.
HI, listened to the second record this time, sounds great!!! Have never been an Edison fan but these sound great, may change my mind. I have Edison skinneys and they are ok but not as good as Columbia or Victor in my estimation though.
Hello Sanfranphono-I'm attempting to do the same thing with my 1925 orthophontic credenza and the same Brunswick sound box, the only questions-exactly which and where did you purchase the orthoponic diaphragm, and does it have a spider, because from what I can see it doesn't look like it does. The other question is-lol-- how the hell did you ever connect it!!?? I'm new at this and had one hell of a time getting the old sound box apart let alone putting this back together please help if you can-- thanks waiting with great anticipation and excitement! ps-I don't care if the second record is worn-Love it, reminds me of BIX
I have a clean copy of this record which I have just played on an Edison machine and then listened again to yours. Its an especially good sounding Edison anyway, but the orthophonic reproduction is smoother with less rumble. Same with the electric. Do you think removing the spider makes much difference? What are you using for a microphone?
The big horn of the 10-50 helps, but Edison had excellent acoustic records up to 1927. I do not get from the electric DDs the full sound that you get from an orthophonic. Bass is not appreciably bigger, only the treble has a little more detail. See if you can find someone to play you a couple of electrics on an Edisonic Phonograph. Check out my Video of Edisonic, you note I play a late acoustic since it's more impressive than the electric.
Sorry for the late comment, but yes they do use stylus technology for the Edison Diamond Disc phonograph. Quite ahead of it's time when you ask me. Same with the cylinder phonograph, which also uses stylus technology. Like for example a sapphire and diamond stylus! It never wears out like the gramophone needles do. It lasts forever!! :)
I believe the Edison diamond disks were 81rpm so the tempo would be slightly slower on a 78prof machine than recorded. I suppose you could adjust the speed control to compensate.
Hello Check out my video of the Edisonic Beethoven - the miking is not as great, but that was Edisons phonograph for electric records. At the end, Edison issued two famous Electrola (electronically amplified) phonographs, the C-1 and C-2, which had a unique dual head pick-up for lateral and DD records. Glad you liked it. Cheers
looks like a brunswick ultona single side reproducer, not from a victrola. Now that i saw the whole video .The sound box looks like the edison side of the double sided ultona with the lateral cut - pathe side removed .
The second record is electric. Never been a fan of the electric DDs, don't seem to sound that much better. But then this is based on a sample size 3 : )
+jmcinvale I did it just for the shock value : ) The drawer was empty, and it dropped on about 7/4" of dense felt. I would not drop a second DD on the first one. The system works perfectly with lateral 78s however.
@riqzster hey, it's the only way. To flange an Edison DD, you would need to modify the tone arm quite a bit. Not going to do that for a little experiment. Unless you go the Pathe way and use a diamond stylus in a pathe style soundbox, as I did in my video: Rachmaninoff Edison vs Victor - should be in the side bar, or check in my channel. Cheers
@riqzster Yeah kindof - with a machine shop you could modify an Edison soundbox to play on a victrola - but way too much work. I;ll leave that to someone else .... : )
I thoroughly enjoyed the video. I know you only ejected the first record for the video, but it still made me cringe, because DD records are so fragile. I really like the idea of playing a DD record with an orthophonic reproducer.
Yea 1 more thing Im tired Goin 2 bed Up all nite messin with that turntable ,hay It worked not good but none the less it didnt cost a million 2 see if there was music on them.Later Taters .
Sorry I forgot If anybody wants them 2 disks i have Ill mail them 2 uall I dont no how much it would cost but i need a little extra 4 gas please Later Taters again.40.00 dollars mabey .
You know, what so much of this shows is how well designed the diamond disk machine really was right from it's very beginning. If you have a good diaphragm in a diamond disk machine they really do a a good job of reproducing the music. Edison did experiment with aluminum diaphragms and even did some experimenting with larger horns and all of that, but it really didn't improve things all that much. It does sound a lot better than I would have expected with one of those Brunswick reproducers!
I was fascinated by your experiment. I have always felt that one of the shortcomings of Edison's later machines was that there was no easy way get a bigger horn on anything. With some spare time and some homemade crane parts, I put a big 12 panel cygnet horn on an Amberola 30, and it sounded great. I did the same thing with a big horn on a Gem!. You can play a Diamond Disc on a modern turntable and amplifier only to realize that the sound put into the record was always greater than the machine's ability to reproduce.
Hello to Reading!
glad you found my videos, I have been enjoying yours. I shall put a video of a straight soundbox playing Edisons soon.
Stay posted.
Cheers from San Francisco.
Very enlightening! Your commentary is splendid. Thanks for taking the time to educate us. A 5-star presentation.
That is an amazing piece of equipment All I done was turn my needle on my british made 78 turn table sideways a little and i could hear the tune so I new there was music on the disk,It was not clear at all so I took the entire arm off and tryied that no better so i taped the arm on and put it sideways and i could hear the tune a little louder,was not clear,but it worked a little.So i put my stereo back together and looked on enternet 4 the two records i have and found u all Thanks 4 bein there.
Oh Moo, there is a special place in Edison Hell for people playing DDs with the Ultona, I know.
As you probably know from playing DDs on a modern turntable, the bass can be all over the place, but usually they seem to emphasize the mid-range and treble with rather subdued bass, even when compared to acoustic Victrola records.
Cheers,
Kudos for taking the time and trouble to produce the result heard here. FASCINATING! While I have a Brunswick with the Ultona, I've only ever played a Diamond Disc once with it. As you note, there is some degree of damage with each and every playing. Your commentary is very informative. Thanks again for your obvious efforts. FIVE STARS!
I can appreciate the time you devote to produce your comprehensive commentaries. Very enlightening! Thank you!
Remarkable machine, the surface noise doesn't bother and indeed the bass sound is increased. congratulations and thanks for shearing! Ida is a beautiful song!
I love the second record!!
I have a Columbia that has a similar set up on the part where you put the needles I have one that has three different tips one's a diamond till turn it sideways rotates has two different needles it has a wonderful sound to it
Very interesting demo and music as well! Thank you very much and congratulations for your device.
Wow that looks like it was an expensive model. I had not seen one like that before with the very large horn. Very cool.
@earlnut Not quite my impression - and I heard them in person.
First - my point of reference was the Edisonic, not the Edison DD phonograph. There is quite a difference between the two, and Theodore Edison realized that a bigger horn gives better sound.
Then, the new set up gives you a much better treble clarity - Edison diaphragms are rather muffled ("mellow in E's parlance). Edison DDs are low volume and have weak bass, so yes for what Edison discs are the Edison Phonograph is adequate.
interesting-years ago waltrip made me an adfaptor to play Pathe (vertical ) on ortho--damamged and gone but much like this idea... really neat video
max
Sounds good!!! I would be interested in hearing an electrically recorded Edison disc on that setup!
a great video ..a great player
Nice demo! You should try an Edison electrically recorded disc and see how it sounds!
I hear these arguments a lot, but believe me when I say that the Edisonic Beethoven (arguably the loudest Edison DD machine with the widest frequency range ) produced a strong and pleasing sound, but could not even get close to the orthophonic Credenza next to it when it came to impact, fidelity and loudness.
For comparison, play any G&T record of De Lucia and Huguet or the Original Dixiend Jazz Band's Tiger rag on a Victor Credenza next to your best Edison machine, and you will see my point.
Yes and no - Pathe was the first one to use sapphire style on records in 1905, but Edison used sapphire styli on cylinders back in the 1890s.
Steel needles on shellac records was a perfectly fine solution. Edison's incompatible Diamond Disc machine of 1912 played records with very high pressure, so that he needed a diamond stylus, but also records made from hard bakelite to withstand the diamond.
Diamonds are fiddly and can break or chip if you are not careful.
Reminds me, I watched Michael Fremer setting up a hugely expensive record deck on UA-cam; talk about fiddly! I've set up a deck myself, but not to that degree. To get the best out of records it is always fiddly, and then there is the static & dust! In the UK we had the Dust Bug but I imagine there were many earlier similar "solutions".
Oh Sanfran, you'll go to phono hell over this one! Bless your heart for all the time you put in this excellent experiment. So, how many DD will fit on the Changer? LOL From a guess before you played a DDI would have thought the bass would have been more enhanced over treble...
You would rip an LP record apart. These Victrolas are designed for very hard records made from shellac.
Cheers
I 👍 the double play 🎶
@merrihew Yep, it's smoother and has more definition.
Also, the recording is much more spatial. Small bass increase.
For all extents and purposes, the Edisonic Beethoven does a job that's very close.
Replaced the spider - needed it for another project, and replaced it with a stiffened cone.
Same difference, possibly the cone is stiffer and gives you a little more treble.
This is absolutely mind-blowing is there a diamond tip does it have three different needles can you rotate the part that holds the needle in it
HI, listened to the second record this time, sounds great!!! Have never been an Edison fan but these sound great, may change my mind. I have Edison skinneys and they are ok but not as good as Columbia or Victor in my estimation though.
Would love to own one of these reproducers for my Victrola.
Holy shit that record player is huge. I would love to have one but I don't have the room. How much did it cost new back in 1927. What else can it play
Hello Sanfranphono-I'm attempting to do the same thing with my 1925 orthophontic credenza and the same Brunswick sound box, the only questions-exactly which and where did you purchase the orthoponic diaphragm, and does it have a spider, because from what I can see it doesn't look like it does.
The other question is-lol-- how the hell did you ever connect it!!??
I'm new at this and had one hell of a time getting the old sound box apart let alone putting this back together please help if you can-- thanks waiting with great anticipation and excitement!
ps-I don't care if the second record is worn-Love it, reminds me of BIX
I have a clean copy of this record which I have just played on an Edison machine and then listened again to yours. Its an especially good sounding Edison anyway, but the orthophonic reproduction is smoother with less rumble. Same with the electric. Do you think removing the spider makes much difference? What are you using for a microphone?
The big horn of the 10-50 helps, but Edison had excellent acoustic records up to 1927. I do not get from the electric DDs the full sound that you get from an orthophonic. Bass is not appreciably bigger, only the treble has a little more detail. See if you can find someone to play you a couple of electrics on an Edisonic Phonograph. Check out my Video of Edisonic, you note I play a late acoustic since it's more impressive than the electric.
If I am getting this right Edison was using stylus technology well before others who were still using needles made of steel?
Regards
Richard
Sorry for the late comment, but yes they do use stylus technology for the Edison Diamond Disc phonograph. Quite ahead of it's time when you ask me. Same with the cylinder phonograph, which also uses stylus technology. Like for example a sapphire and diamond stylus! It never wears out like the gramophone needles do. It lasts forever!! :)
I believe the Edison diamond disks were 81rpm so the tempo would be slightly slower on a 78prof machine than recorded. I suppose you could adjust the speed control to compensate.
Sounds GREAT to me.Loved the reproduction of the electric record.When I moved 7 years ago I dumped my 10-50.That machine must have weighed a 1/2 ton.
Fascinating. Love learning of these old machines and listening.
Hello Check out my video of the Edisonic Beethoven - the miking is not as great, but that was Edisons phonograph for electric records.
At the end, Edison issued two famous Electrola (electronically amplified) phonographs, the C-1 and C-2, which had a unique dual head pick-up for lateral and DD records.
Glad you liked it.
Cheers
wonder how it would sound with one of the Edison 52000 electrics??
looks like a brunswick ultona single side reproducer, not from a victrola. Now that i saw the whole video .The sound box looks like the edison side of the double sided ultona with the lateral cut - pathe side removed .
The second record is electric.
Never been a fan of the electric DDs, don't seem to sound that much better. But then this is based on a sample size 3
: )
can you put newer records on it?
The way the record drops after being rejected does it harm or have the potential to harm the record?
+jmcinvale I did it just for the shock value : )
The drawer was empty, and it dropped on about 7/4" of dense felt. I would not drop a second DD on the first one.
The system works perfectly with lateral 78s however.
@riqzster hey, it's the only way. To flange an Edison DD, you would need to modify the tone arm quite a bit. Not going to do that for a little experiment.
Unless you go the Pathe way and use a diamond stylus in a pathe style soundbox, as I did in my video: Rachmaninoff Edison vs Victor - should be in the side bar, or check in my channel.
Cheers
@riqzster Yeah kindof - with a machine shop you could modify an Edison soundbox to play on a victrola - but way too much work.
I;ll leave that to someone else ....
: )
"Chale, es de que tá rechido"
I thoroughly enjoyed the video. I know you only ejected the first record for the video, but it still made me cringe, because DD records are so fragile. I really like the idea of playing a DD record with an orthophonic reproducer.
Was it a Pathe stylus?
No, a straight diamond stylus. Pathe styli are potentially larger, but could be tried-
You played a Long Play?
Nah, you know that LP's skip like mad, without a wormgear this would be a very bad idea.
Cheers
So it's usual to get up to 8 minutes per side?
No, those are 2x4minute sides.
On an Edison DD the max is almost 5 mins per 10" side
@TheRiqzster Check my video Rachmaninoff C# Minor Prelude and the video Pathe Hallelujah for an answer ...
Define new? the machine will play records made before the LP, that's up to 1950, though works best with records before 1935.
Carsten
the C-1 and C-2 are both tube amplified radio phonographs.
If you go to myvintagetv dot c o m click on consoles, the C-1 is right at the top.
Cheers
I mean relatively new. those are edison records. I mean like a beetles record
Yea 1 more thing Im tired Goin 2 bed Up all nite messin with that turntable ,hay It worked not good but none the less it didnt cost a million 2 see if there was music on them.Later Taters .
Sorry I forgot If anybody wants them 2 disks i have Ill mail them 2 uall I dont no how much it would cost but i need a little extra 4 gas please Later Taters again.40.00 dollars mabey .
SO WHAT? STILL NEITHER HI NOR LOW END...