All Activity

Thanks for that. I obviously don't know if your cabinet may have been refinished with a new decal, but the large decal is appropriate for that serial number. The small decal evidently came into use around 712800 or shortly thereafter.

My Columbia AA is: Serial # 712013 Reproducer Eagle Decal large No back decal 10" Nickel horn It looks so nice , however, that it may have been refinished and a new large decal used.

Thanks René. You are a mine of information! I've seen bakelite but never heard of gutta percha. Anyway, I will leave it well alone now i know.

That looks absolutely fantastic. It's amazing how just a light cleaning brings up the original shine to that degree. The mouthpiece is made of gutta percha. Originally it was dark black, but gutta percha tends to turn brown (or sometimes greenish) over time, from UV exposure. It is not metal and scratches easily. I'm sure you are correct that the scratches in the center come from an exhibitor holding a horn against it for recording and playback.

Not sure if you can stand 7 minutes of me talking! https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VwPUen5i2W2xPVb5v9YTSBmExWJ5xUlM/view?usp=sharing As I mention at the end everyone's comments, without exception, have been so much appreciated.

Thanks George. Video coming....

It looks great, Richard! Nice work - - George P.

Forgive me if this has been addressed elsewhere; I couldn't find anything. In the past, I followed the Compleat Talking Machine instructions on cleaning a black japanned Q bed plate with dish soap. That particular bed-plate was almost devoid of any original pin stripining or decals. I recently acquired a really nice 2nd model Q with 95% of the bed-plate pin striping and decals still present, but it doesn't appear the machine has been cleaned at all. How should I go about cleaning the plate on this example? My apologies for the lack of photos; I don't have the machine with me at the moment. Thanks very much, Jennison

The start of the paintwork. Using magnifying glasses, distilled water and loads of cotton buds, gently wiped off with a microfibre cloth. Just this little section at the front left took over 2 hours. I tried a little white/mineral spirit on a tiny portion of gunk on the back of the plate. It had no effect. So I will not be using anything else apart from distilled water going forward. I examined every cotton bud and area after application and as far as I could tell there were no flakes of paint or detailing being removed. Just dirt. There are some chips in the detailing but these were already there. Just using distilled water has still been very worthwhile. It hasn't got rid of some of the grime/oil deposits/whatever - see the photo with the arrow - but at least there is a little shine showing through. It still shows its use and age. Perfect I think. You can see the difference between the left hand side of the plate, which has been cleaned and the right hand side, which has not.

Hi, if this case is still available I’d like to buy it please advise a total with shipping to Wisconsin 53551 and method of payment. My email address is morris_j@rocketmail.com

This electrical recording of "You And I" by Jack Shilkret's Orchestra was recorded in Montreal, Canada on January 23, 1925. It appeared on a promotional record on Canadian Victor 19571 A-A with the regular acoustic version recorded the day before in Camden, NJ on the flip side. The usual "VE" in the oval is pressed in the deadwax area and also appears on the label. The label is marked "Not For Sale" and this recording did not appear on a regular release. Jack Shilkret's Orchestra - You And I.wav

I had a Victrola 11 that had an exploded spring a number of years ago. It happened when I wasn’t around but it must have caused quite a disturbance and I imagine the machine may have even bounced. When I realized it had happened I opened things up and there was grease everywhere all over the bottom of the motor board, the motor, and everything under the motor board. I sent the motor to a repair guy and he called me asking how that happened. He had never seen a spring in that shape before. All was well after a new spring, but it was quite an event.

Has anyone ever seen a mainspring explode like thins one did? It had to sound terrible. It is from an Edison Standard I am working on.

Here is my info. The only thing I wonder about is that the crank is all black. The others seem to be nickel. -- serial number: 712187 — reproducer: Eagle -- decal size: large -- last date of award decal on back: 1900 -- type of horn: 10 inch nickel

I keep a census of known surviving Bergmann Exhibition tinfoils, as well as others such as the Hardy tinfoils of 1878 and the Parlor Models of late 1879-1880. I know of the existence of Bergmann phonographs numbers 105, 110, 114, 117, 144, 145, 154, 172, 185, and 205, plus two more with illegible numbers. One of those is in the Deutsche Museum in Germany, and has several very peculiar features which make me question if it might be a prototype of some sort. I also know of 3 experimental models made with dual flywheels, without serial numbers, which were apparently never used commercially and which probably stayed in the Edison lab. They are now housed at the Edison National Historic Park, the Henry Ford Museum, and the Smithsonian.

Fascinating René. Do you have a record of which of the above are still in existence?

Not really. Edison signed over the rights to the phonograph to the Edison Speaking Phonograph Company, which had several wealthy financiers backing it. The ESPCo was formed to exploit the phonograph. Initially they looked at selling small machines to the public, but that was almost immediately abandoned, in favor of licensing exhibitors to have exclusive use in specific geographic areas. Several machine shops were solicited to manufacture phonographs in the spring of 1878. By summer several improvements had been made, and Sigmund Bergmann was contracted to make the large exhibition machines that dominated the market for public exhibitions. Yours fall into that group. The Edison Speaking Phonograph Company incurred significant costs in making machines, but offset those with profits on their sales, and on royalties from their use in public exhibitions. Edison also earned royalties as part of the licensing deal. But when he wanted a machine to gift to some notable person, ESPCo had to expense that cost since they were taking the financial hit. Edison himself didn't finance their manufacture so he was was charged.

Thanks to everyone for that information. I hope we can get much more. At this point I have only 12 numbers recorded, so too little to make absolute conclusions. But what is already clear is that D reproducers outnumber Eagle by 9 to 3. The lowest number on file has a D, while the third highest has an Eagle. So clearly this is inconsistent. I did some Googling and found several AAs, but only a couple had serial numbers listed. However, the majority of pictures I found show a D reproducer, so in reality they outnumber the Eagle by even more than I document by serial number. The D was available by 1902 as an extra-cost upgrade to owners of any Graphophone other than the Q. So anyone could have taken their original Eagle and replaced it with a D, either in the early 1900s or as recently as yesterday. Consequently I suspect that this exercise will be inconclusive. It was (and still is) far too easy to replace a reproducer. I can only speculate that these (at least early ones) originally had Eagles. It's probable that later ones were sold with D, but even that isn't a certainty. The catalog entry doesn't specifically mention AA so that remains an open question. It is likely that many owners upgraded. And the fact that the third highest number I have on file, with a very high number, has an Eagle makes it clear that there we can't document a cutoff date where Columbia switched from one to the other. Anyone may have swapped an original D for an earlier Eagle in modern times. There's also a discrepancy in rear decals. The lowest number I have listed shows a 1900 decal, but the next 3 are blank. Then decals appear, except (apparently) the third from highest, which is blank. That could simply mean someone swapped the case in modern times. No way to know, though if we could get a LOT more numbers it might help reveal the truth.

Chuck, keep in mind that the original owner may have upgraded from the #2 Eagle Reproducer to the D1 or D2. It would have made good sense at the time. George P.

By the way. For close ups I use an my 4 year old Poco F3 phone, which is still going strong. It's the only phone I've ever found with a 5 megapixel macro camera. All others, AFAIK, even if they have a macro lens, are 2 megapixel.

Ok the brass mandrel was going to be next but you will be delighted to know that I won't be cleaning it at all. Dipping, in anything and especially brass restorer, was out of the question for me - even If I was going to remove the axle/shaft. Too much risk. Potentially Vulpex as suggested or Castille soap would do the trick but I can't wash it off easily. WD-40 was ill advised and isopropyl alcohol not recommended. My next option was distilled water (changed nothing) and white spirit (changed almost nothing). White spirit came up again as the most gentle of all products for brass. I used the refined version but it made so little impact with a microfiber cloth, and I wasn't going to start using 0000 wool or brushes. So, for the time being it stays as it is, grimy and tarnished. I'm not even going to brush out the grooves. Next is the paintwork. Even more care on this as mentioned previously. Cotton buds, distilled water and I will see what that achieves. I'll bet very little. I'm also betting that white / mineral spirit - the best out of all the cleaning agents for japanned paint - it seems - will also have little effect. I will try cleaning a tiny portion 3-5mm of the lower baseplate near the mounting screw and see how I go. If no result, then the paintwork won't be done either. Also if the grime can't come off then there's not much point in applying Renaissance wax, as it will probably push the dirt around or layer on top of it. Unless you guys have any ideas? Will it clean partially as well? Thanks muchly. Types of White Spirit Standard/Regular White Spirit (Type 0-1): Contains 15-20% aromatic hydrocarbons (toluene, xylene, benzene-ring compounds) Contains 80-85% aliphatic hydrocarbons (straight-chain compounds) Strong kerosene-like smell (the aromatics) Stronger solvent action—better at dissolving oils, waxes, greases Slightly more toxic if inhaled heavily Reduced Smell/Odourless White Spirit (Type 2-3): Contains less than 5% aromatic hydrocarbons (heavily refined to remove aromatics) Contains 95%+ aliphatic hydrocarbons (or purely aliphatic) Minimal smell (some residual odour but much less) Slightly weaker solvent action—still effective but less aggressive Lower toxicity inhalation risk

Well Rene our idea about what reproducer was used by early or late production went south with George's AA. His is only 5 numbers lower than mine and has the #2 reproducer. If the serial number is an indication of production they were made on the same day. It sort of confirms the thought that Columbia used whatever was in the parts bin. Also my rear decal is the same with 1900 date. Chuck

I'm sure you René and maybe others have these letters and logs too but I thought I would post them. The last page confirms no. 205 was sold to Edison. Amazing he was paying for his own machine. I only found one other no. 192 sent to Edison for 'No charge'. https://hub.catalogit.app/edisonium/folder/bergmann-zinfolien-phonograph/entry/phonograph-bergmann-exhibition-tinfoil

S/N 712244 Eagle Reproducer Large decal 1900 Awards decal on rear panel 10" nickel horn George P.

According to a 1902 Columbia Machine Catalog in the APS Library, the improved reproducer Model "D" was "now furnished as regular equipment" on their entire Graphophone lineup (although AA not listed), with a further disclaimer the the Model D was NOT suitable for the "Q" types. Owners could exchange their older reproducers for the Model D for $2.00.