PeterPoggi Posted January 1, 2023 Posted January 1, 2023 As a newbie to this hobby and very ignorant of acoustic players or shellac records, I frequently found myself confused about which types of records should be played using different machines and their reproducers. I often looked for a reference on the subject but could find none. So, with a great deal of input from Gertie Maeder over several inquiries, i made an attempt at creating reference, primarily as an exercise to enhance for my own knowledge. I am glad to offer it up here for use, additional text or photo contributions, etc. Reproducer Compatibility Chart.docx 5
RodPickett Posted January 1, 2023 Posted January 1, 2023 Thank you for your efforts and contributions. We look forward to updates on this initiative.
PeterPoggi Posted January 2, 2023 Author Posted January 2, 2023 Apparently there's a cutoff time for edits to an original post, so I'll post our first (minor) revision here. We just renamed it for clarification, added a few more contributor credits, identification of old records, and a referring link to www.discography.com Reproducer to Recording Media Compatibility Chart.docx 1
PeterPoggi Posted January 3, 2023 Author Posted January 3, 2023 Couple changes and fixes. Added a revision history section up front. Great suggestions from Rod Pickett. Any other suggestions are always welcome. Reproducer to Recording Media Compatibility Rev3.pdf 1
coppercoils Posted January 5, 2023 Posted January 5, 2023 (edited) There's also the Victor No. 4 soundbox which is a mica diaphragm soundbox that victor determined was good enough for electrical recordings and released in 1926. It was available as an upgrade to acoustic machines as well as on some portables and tabletop machines into 1927. It looks like HMV may have used their version for longer, into 1931 on their HMV 101 portable. Edited January 5, 2023 by coppercoils 1
PeterPoggi Posted January 5, 2023 Author Posted January 5, 2023 Thanks - The No 4, i would have thought that the 5 and 6 were even higher quality - weren't they sequential improvements?
Valecnik Posted January 7, 2023 Posted January 7, 2023 (edited) I don't know if you can get much better than a Victrola no. 4 if you want to play late 20s, even early thirties discs on an early 20s or earlier acoustic Victor machine. The numbers 5 and 6 fix to a larger diameter elbow so they would not fit. Pictured below are the H.M.V. (British) and Electrola (German) No 4. They are exactly the same as the Victgrola no. 4 except marking. Also pictured is an Exhibition for comparison. Edited January 7, 2023 by Valecnik text 1
PeterPoggi Posted January 7, 2023 Author Posted January 7, 2023 Thank you - I'm still quite ne at this so I appreciate your clarifying this for me. I"ll talk to George Paul and see about working this into the document.
Valecnik Posted January 7, 2023 Posted January 7, 2023 30 minutes ago, PeterPoggi said: Thank you - I'm still quite ne at this so I appreciate your clarifying this for me. I"ll talk to George Paul and see about working this into the document. No problem at all. Also, I would add that needle type makes a big difference. For an acoustic 78, loud or medium tone are often preferrable. With late 20s to early 30s electrically recorded disc a soft tone needle is almost always preferrable.
PeterPoggi Posted January 27, 2023 Author Posted January 27, 2023 I've gotten unusually busy, but I'm going to do this. Would it be OK if I used your photo in the document when I add the updates?
Valecnik Posted January 27, 2023 Posted January 27, 2023 2 hours ago, PeterPoggi said: I've gotten unusually busy, but I'm going to do this. Would it be OK if I used your photo in the document when I add the updates? If you mean my photos, yes feel free.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now