Page 2 of 4

Re: Meltrope soundboxes.

Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 1:17 pm
by epigramophone
Many UK collectors, myself included, rate the Meltrope the next best thing to the EMG and Expert soundboxes, and at a fraction of the price. Once rebuilt they require little attention, whereas adjusting an EMG or Expert, especially a 4-spring, calls for a good ear and considerable skill. I know my limitations and leave that job to others.

Re: Meltrope soundboxes.

Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 1:18 pm
by PeterF
Is the 3 the best one to seek first?

Re: Meltrope soundboxes.

Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 6:27 pm
by estott
They can boost the performance of a good machine- I've been told that with a Meltrope you can make a take a quality open horn machine & make it quite close to an Orthophonic.

Re: Meltrope soundboxes.

Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 6:30 pm
by estott
PeterF wrote:Is the 3 the best one to seek first?
From what I've been told, the I and II are best if you want to "tune" your soundbox for optimum performance on a specific machine, and that the III is not built to be tuned. I have the III and it is very user friendly.

Re: Meltrope soundboxes.

Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 2:03 am
by Lucius1958
I have yet to test my Meltrope III, as my hearing has not yet recovered (or, as I have not yet sprung for new hearing aids); but I will check it out eventually - both on my P-1, comparing it with the Prime soundbox; and possibly on the C-250 (assuming I can swap it out from the soundbox on my 'Jewel' adapter).

Bill

Re: Meltrope soundboxes.

Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 6:01 am
by epigramophone
Reproduction rubber couplings are available in a variety of internal diameters, so it should be possible to source one to fit your adaptor.

Re: Meltrope soundboxes.

Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2017 9:12 am
by CarlosV
PeterF wrote:
How does their sound compare to common US soundboxes? Along the lines of the Victrola #2 or #4, or more like the orthophonic? Or?

Thanks.
If your intention is to utilize the Meltrope on a Credenza or any other orthophonic machine, my recommendation is not to bother. I tried Meltropes, EMGs and Expert soundboxes on the othophonic machines and the Victor orthophonic reproducer (IF in good restored shape) outperforms them all. Meltropes work well to improve the sound of older machines: the Meltrope III vastly improved the sound of the Victor schoolhouse over its original Victor 2. The Meltrope II also outperformed the original Columbia soundbox on the Columbia 810 (the large Viva Tonal contemporary to the Credenza). I tried a Meltrope III on a EMG and on an Expert and frankly did not hear any improvement at all, but I never tried the Meltrope II on it, maybe it makes a change, but with these machines the bar is already quite high in terms of quality of reproduction. It is fun to tinker around with different soundboxes, though.

Re: Meltrope soundboxes.

Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 3:35 pm
by HMV130
I just found this old topic and allow me to say that this is an extremely interesting one.

Being a favorite of mine, Meltrope soundboxes and accessories are an important part of my collection, it so happened that I have made extensive research and I would like to share with you my findings.

In relation to the soundboxes, from the late 20's up to the late 40's the "Amplifiers L.t.d. of Billet Road, Walthamstow, London E.17" manufactured three main models, I, II, III and two special models IIa (no reference nor information found in The Gramophone magazine or elsewhere) and IIIa.

Variations were also available in various finishes (chrome - surely mod. I, II, IIa -, bronze - surely mod. III, IIIa-, gild - surely mod. II, III) and with different backplate (the so referred "HMV" for large tonearm and the "Continental" for normal tonearm - different diameter of the compression ring and rubber collar regarding the model II and probably I, IIa while different diameter of the rubber collar only regarding model III, IIIa).

To be thorough, the mod. III has been subject through the years to minor modifications in the front plate’s design. Furthermore, gramophone manufacturers could have their own name engraved on the front mask as long as a large order was placed (i.e. Antoria, Selecta ecc.).
epigramophone wrote:[...] Although the ad states that the "III" is intended for use with steel needles, I have examples cut with round holes for steel and triangular for fibre. Why would two versions have been made? My theory is that the earlier "I/II" design was discontinued, leaving only the "III", and that a version was needed to keep the fibre enthusiasts happy.
The expert committee of “The Gramophone” reviewed a Meltrope soundbox for the first time in April 1928 (probably the mod. II, article shared by “emgcr”). It was specified that that early model has been designed “to meet some of the difficulties” related to the use of fibre needles and the soundbox “seems to be most suitable” for that use. I think this does not mean that the mod. II was not intended to be used or could not perform properly with steel needles, although limitations apparently occurred (too brilliant and edgy tone).

The review of the new mod. III in July 1929 whose diaphragm has been extensively analysed (please consider the attached article n.1) seems to confirm that, and the new mounting and spring system for the stylus-bar (horizontally mounted ball bearings and cover plate arranged to provide spring pressure) that has been developed overcame the limitations of the previous model. I suppose that they tried to balance the performance of the soundbox (trade-off between optimal response with steel and fibre needles) rather that design a new one specifically for steel needles. This could explain why the early mod. III have the stylus-bar with triangular sockets and could also prove the mod. IIa as an early attempt to improve the original design without major modifications (it is identical to the mod. II except that it is lighter and oval shaped - too light for fibre needles).

In April 1930 the mod. III has been reviewed again by the expert committee (please consider the attached article n.2) after being subject to minor modifications of the mounting and spring system in order to eliminate the “hysteresis” effect observed during the first diaphragm test in 1929.

Following this, I believe that a substantial improvement of the mod. III was tempted, as to overcome the trade-off in order to obtain a better overall performance. Ascertained that this was not easily doable (probably for economic reasons after the Great Depression) the mod. III has been earmarked to be used with steel needles only (indeed later mod. III have the stylus-bar with round needle socket) and the new model mod. IIIa has been designed specifically for fibre needles. This last model was reviewed in February 1931 (please consider the attached article n.3) and it was based on the same design of the mod. III while featuring a new stylus-bar which was able to use interchangeable aluminum chucks in lieu of the usual needle screw to grip the needle.

Re: Meltrope soundboxes.

Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 3:44 pm
by PeterF
Really informative and interesting. Thanks!

Re: Meltrope soundboxes.

Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2020 8:19 pm
by AZ*
PeterF wrote:Really informative and interesting. Thanks!
Ditto! :rose: