Edison DD Record on Victor 10-50 Orthophonic Victrola

How does an Edison Diamond Disc sound through an Orthophonic Horn? This has been the certifiable wet dream of any serious Edison -phile. : )


While at the time there were several after market solutions available to fit an Edison compatible soundbox to a Victrola, the most convincing solution was the Brunswick Ultona soundbox, whose Edison side mimicked the construction of an Edison reproducer.

Now here you have an example - an experiment of mine that I did a few years ago. I took an Ultona soundbox and made it to fit into the tonearm of an Orthophonic Victrola. Originally I started out with the Brunswick mica diaphragm, which sounded great, but exhibited some damaging resonances. So the next step was to refit the reproducer with an orthophonic diaphragm. Not the quantum leap that I expected, but it increased the treble details of the reproduction, while not doing much in terms of additonal bass response.

The 1927 Victor Automatic Orthophonic Victrola 10-50 has the largest and highest fidelity horn of any home Victrola ever produced in the USA.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krsijE7TCZM

What I am playing in this demo:

Edison ACOUSTIC Diamond Disc 51177-L
Ritzi Mitzi - Foxtrot
Dave Kaplan Melodists, an Edison Studio Band
1923.05.17NYC
This side is one of the greatest sounding Edison records.

Edison Electric Diamon Disc 52321-L
Ida! sweet as apple cider - One-step
Winegar's Penn Boys
1928.05.04 NYC
Recorded with the new RCA recording equipment.
My only electric DD, rather worn and with a skip - my apologies.

A word to the recording:
Recorded straight from the 10-50 with no additional manipulations other than volume level.
The electric DD is significantly less loud than the acoustic.
I have elevated the volume to +3dB. Most distortions you hear on the acoustic DD are digital artifacts, most on the electric DD are wear.

So, what do I think of this experiment of the 10-50 horn vs an Edison machine:

- there is some bass boost, but it is not that impressive. On the electric DD bass sounds a little muddy.
It brings the usually faint piano accompaniment forward, and reveals bass lines that you did not know were there. While I consider the improvement minor, it does bring a full body to voices and acoustic violin, which changes the violin tone from saccharine to full-bodied.

- The biggest change I hear is an amazing increase in treble detail: Cymbals, clarinet overtones, trumpet, violins all acquire a richness in detail which I only know from some pre-1910 European recordings. This I consider the greatest achievement.

- With the 10-50 horn, which is very good at thia, you get a great increase at presence: You start to hear the room acoustics, instruments step forward and create the rich tapestry of a staggered soundstage.

The reasons why I call this an experiment and not a solution, are the following:
- Even with the Orthophonic diaphragm, there are still some resonances in the system. The are sonically slight, but may physically damage the record via feed-back.
- As is known from the original Brunswick Ultona, while it sounds marvellous, it is rather rough on records. Brown spots under bright light appear fairly soon when played with this set up.
- On records like pop and dance, where not much treble detail is necessary, the Edisonic Phonograph delivers a performance that comes quite close to the 10-50. It's in part due to the horn of the Edisonic Beethoven, which develops a pseudo bass through internal reflections which actually sounds quite impressive.
- Without the worm gear, if you slightly mishandle the reproducer, it will skid across the record, leaving a permanent scratch.

For me, since the Edisonic Beethoven (developed by Edison for Electric Diamond Discs)
video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8k5X_R5Xmd4&feature=related
was good enough, I never further pursued the 10-50 diamond reproducer.

Here are some suggestions for further investigation:

- String & Weight gantry to counteract the skating force.
- Exploring modifications of the Mica diaphragms by using different gasket materials, and adding weights to the center (like the Edison whalefish bone cone)
- Experimenting with ways of the orthophonic diaphragm spider and gaskets to dampen unwanted frequencies
- Trying out different materials for the string ( silk, polyethylene, or metal re-inforced woven silk).

To see an Edisonic Beethoven and a Victor 10-50 record changer in their proper function,
check out more great tunes and amazing vintage phonographs at My YouTube Videos:

http://www.youtube.com/user/sanfranphono


More about this and other machines
on my Changer Website
http://myvintagetv.com/updatepages1/c...

Category:

Music

Tags:

• Thomas
• Alava
• Edison
• Edisonic
• Phonograph
• Electric
• Diamond
• Disc
• DD
• Record
• Recreation
• Re-Creation
• Beethoven
• Schubert
• Shubert
• reproducer
• adapter
• adaptor
• Exponential
• Horn
• Automatic
• Dave
• Kaplan
• Melodists
• Ritzi
• Mitzi
• Foxtrot
• Orthophonic
• Victrola
• Ida!
• sweet
• as
• apple
• cider
• One-step
• Winegar's
• Penn
• Pennsylvania
• Boys
• 10-50
• First
• Changer
• Machine
• Victor
• Credenza
• Gramophone
• Grammophon
• Talking
• machine

[earlnut]

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!

[sanfranphono]

@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.

[TheRiqzster]

You ask how it sounds? Well, if you ask me, Victor's own records should sound half as good on their own machines! Hey, how would you like to to try that same experiment with the Pathe side of that reproducer?

[sanfranphono]

@TheRiqzster Check my video Rachmaninoff C# Minor Prelude and the video Pathe Hallelujah for an answer ...

[merrihew]

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?

[sanfranphono]

@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.

[dpbsmith]

To this non-aficionado, it sounds very pleasant and listenable. But I still don't understand how the Edison Tone Tests could have fooled anyone. This sounds about like a small plastic table radio of the 1950s...

[gmmix]

Very enlightening! Your commentary is splendid. Thanks for taking the time to educate us. A 5-star presentation.

[MichaelJHuman]

Wow that looks like it was an expensive model. I had not seen one like that before with the very large horn. Very cool.

[mukke67]

a great video ..a great player