Aluminium vs mica diaphragms

Discussions on Talking Machines & Accessories
Phono48
Victor IV
Posts: 1313
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 2:38 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Aluminium vs mica diaphragms

Post by Phono48 »

Thanks for that! I have never found Garrard motors, as fitted to your 112, to need much in the way of lubrication,even after many years, so hopefully you will not need to do anything more in the near future. The cranks on all these Columbia portables simply unscrew anticlockwise, so maybe a few drops of penetrating oil left for a few days might shift it?

Barry

Phono48
Victor IV
Posts: 1313
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 2:38 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Aluminium vs mica diaphragms

Post by Phono48 »

GabrielePfr wrote:Interesting. When I took it off it looked like a regular o ring, pretty uniform. I'll take a closer look at it when disassembling next time.
Ah, we may be talking at cross-purposes here. Which soundbox is fitted to your 112, the No.9, or the No 15? It SHOULD be the No.9,but they have often been updated to the 15.

User avatar
GabrielePfr
Victor Jr
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2018 7:53 pm

Re: Aluminium vs mica diaphragms

Post by GabrielePfr »

Phono48 wrote:Thanks for that! I have never found Garrard motors, as fitted to your 112, to need much in the way of lubrication,even after many years, so hopefully you will not need to do anything more in the near future. The cranks on all these Columbia portables simply unscrew anticlockwise, so maybe a few drops of penetrating oil left for a few days might shift it?

Barry
That's good to know, thanks! I think the mainspring might need taking out and regreasing in near future, it makes a strange shifting sound every once in a while, as if it's sticking and releasing. I'll apply some oil then to the handle, then!

User avatar
GabrielePfr
Victor Jr
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2018 7:53 pm

Re: Aluminium vs mica diaphragms

Post by GabrielePfr »

Phono48 wrote:
GabrielePfr wrote:Interesting. When I took it off it looked like a regular o ring, pretty uniform. I'll take a closer look at it when disassembling next time.
Ah, we may be talking at cross-purposes here. Which soundbox is fitted to your 112, the No.9, or the No 15? It SHOULD be the No.9,but they have often been updated to the 15.
It's Columbia No.9!

Phono48
Victor IV
Posts: 1313
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 2:38 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Aluminium vs mica diaphragms

Post by Phono48 »

GabrielePfr wrote:It's Columbia No.9!
In which case, ignore my previous post! You are right, on this soundbox, it's just a regular O ring.

Barry

User avatar
GabrielePfr
Victor Jr
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2018 7:53 pm

Re: Aluminium vs mica diaphragms

Post by GabrielePfr »

Phono48 wrote:
GabrielePfr wrote:It's Columbia No.9!
In which case, ignore my previous post! You are right, on this soundbox, it's just a regular O ring.

Barry
That's great, got worried for a second!

OrthoFan
Victor V
Posts: 2178
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 7:12 pm

Re: Aluminium vs mica diaphragms

Post by OrthoFan »

GabrielePfr wrote:It's Columbia No.9!
In that case, you might find this post string from this forum helpful:

http://forum.talkingmachine.info/viewto ... f=2&t=4920

OrthoFan

User avatar
GabrielePfr
Victor Jr
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2018 7:53 pm

Re: Aluminium vs mica diaphragms

Post by GabrielePfr »

OrthoFan wrote:
GabrielePfr wrote:It's Columbia No.9!
In that case, you might find this post string from this forum helpful:

http://forum.talkingmachine.info/viewto ... f=2&t=4920

OrthoFan
Thank you.

shoshani
Victor I
Posts: 120
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2017 2:52 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Aluminium vs mica diaphragms

Post by shoshani »

Just to muddy the water somewhat, not everyone was convinced that aluminium was better, back in the day. The German branch of EMI, Electrola, for years marketed a portable called, if I remember correctly, the 106. This was basically the HMV 102, but instead of a 5A or 5B soundbox it used a No 4 whose backplate had a wider "Orthophonic" sized rubber isolator and brass ring. Electrola called this the 4A. They turn up in auctions now and then, but they seem to be made entirely of pot metal, front and back. The few I've seen haven't aged well.

epigramophone
Victor Monarch Special
Posts: 5204
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 1:21 pm
Personal Text: An analogue relic trapped in a digital world.
Location: The Somerset Levels, UK.

Re: Aluminium vs mica diaphragms

Post by epigramophone »

I had an Electrola 106R (R indicating a red case) for several years. It was essentially the "works" of an HMV101 housed in a 102 case, with the Electrola No.4A soundbox which fortunately had no evidence of metal fatigue.

I eventually sold it to a beginner, knowing it to be well sorted and reliable. There is nothing more likely to put a beginner off the hobby than to experience trouble with their first machine, and I am pleased to say that the Electrola is still giving good service.

Post Reply