Cliftophone reproducer - UPDATE

[Curt A]

Last fall I made a Le Palmodian replica using a horizontally mounted Cliftophone reproducer. The volume was incredibly soft, so I looked at the hole where the sound exits to the horn and discovered that the hole was only ⅛" in diameter. There was a raised round area surrounding the hole that I thought was machined into the body of the reproducer. After a few taps with a brass hammer, it turned out to be a brass plug that was pressed into place. I removed it and the volume increased, but the sound is not clear and somewhat garbled, so I am thinking it has to be the diaphragm. The diaphragm is a strange looking one that looks like synthetic tortoise shell with a radial design pressed in. It seems to be thicker than most diaphragm and not as flexible, it is also connected to the needle bar with a thin wire. Has anyone had any experience with a diaphragm like that? I am thinking of replacing it with something else. It's about the size of a Victrola #2 and I used Victrola #2 gaskets to replace the rock hard originals. So, it's not the gaskets, but the diaphragm most likely...

[kirtley2012]

The Cliftophones always sounded a bit thin, those diaphragms are fairly thick celluloid, I had one not too long ago, sold it due to lack of room in my old flat, and they were intriguing things, more suited to acoustic records, but not the machine I would approach when looking for audio quality, if the diaphragm can be removed without damage, it may be fun to experiment with other diaphragms, but if the diaphragm would be harmed while removing, maybe it would be better finding another soundbox designed with better sound quality in mind?
In my mind, though cliftophones for the most part aren't high end machines (there were some fancier models), they're still intriguing enough to be collectable and those diaphragms certainly aren't being reproduced, so it might be worth weighing up the option between replacing the diaphragm or replacing the soundbox, I imagine an orthorphonic Le Palmodian would be an interesting thing!

[Curt A]

The reason I used the Cliftophone reproducer was the fact that it plays horizontally, so the needle faces downward from the bottom of the violin. I couldn't think of another reproducer that plays that way, similar to an Edison Diamond Disc reproducer... So, I guess I'll experiment with a different diaphragm and modifying the needle bar to use a small screw to attach to the diaphragm like a Victor or HMV, instead of the wire. Any other ideas?

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=47652&hilit=le+palmodian

Curt

[Inigo]

You could see also if the needlebar fulcrum is free enough. I suppose it will need good free movement but with the minimum side play, too avoid any buzzing.

[Orchorsol]

I agree with all Alex has said, and Inigo, plus: are the gaskets soft and compliant? I've had quite a few of these and still have several - they aren't the greatest performers but they've never been short of volume, so I'm inclined to think it may not be the diaphragm. I forget how the diaphragm is fixed and whether it's easy to detach it from the needlebar - but either way, they aren't exactly rare, so there isn't much to lose in trying!

[jamiegramo]

If the problem is the diaphragm this could be because celluloid becomes hard and brittle over time. It’s an inevitable problem with most early plastics that they will deteriorate. If the future looks bleak for humanity it is also bleak for the Cliftophone. Perhaps they sounded really good when new, after all Brunswick bought them out.

I am wondering if you could apply a thin coat of linseed or mineral oil to the celluloid, this could then be lightly over coated with a small amount of alcohol (methylated spirit/denatured alcohol). The idea is to penetrate the celluloid and soften it so that it goes back to being more compliant for sound reproduction. Alcohol is an ingredient of celluloid but there is a danger it could melt the celluloid. I guess you could test the edge or I’ve got some old bits of celluloid I could dig out and test with meths to see how it reacts. This is only an idea...

This assumes it’s not the gaskets...

[Curt A]

The gaskets are fresh Victrola #2 red rubber gaskets, so that's not the problem. I think I am going to try to replace the actual needle bar (not the entire assembly) with one that has a hole with screw to attach to the diaphragm, like a Victor or HMV. Then I think I am going to replace the diaphragm with either a mica or aluminum one. Maybe the combination will succeed...

[Curt A]

After examining the celluloid diaphragm in this reproducer, I decided that although it was an attractive fake tortoise shell design, it was absolutely worthless as a phonograph diaphragm. Good diaphragms produce a "ring" sound when dropped on edge on a hard surface - this one made a thud like a piece of wood - totally tone dead. Also, the needle bar itself was a bad design, with a thick shape and attached to the diaphragm by a thin wire.

So, I decided to redesign the reproducer. For whatever reason, there was a knurled brass plug manufactured into the center of the reproducer body, which only allowed an approx. ⅛" hole on the back for sound to escape. That was quickly remedied by tapping the plug out, which allowed the sound hole to increase to ½" - ⅝" or approx. the size of a normal sound hole in most reproducers. The needle bar issue was solved by cutting off the original needle bar and then using a generic needle bar cut to the same size and soldered into place. The needle bar connects securely to the diaphragm with a small screw through the center hole. The original celluloid diaphragm was discarded and replaced with a #2 Victrola reproducer mica diaphragm.

The new alterations have increased the sound volume, clarity and tone by 100%... where before it sounded muffled and muddy, it is now actually enjoyable to listen to. The picture below shows the new mica diaphragm and the new needle bar installed (the two silver colored screws are mounting screws that hold the reproducer to the bottom of the violin).

[Inigo]

Great!

[Orchorsol]

Really interesting to hear. I think all of those celluloid diaphragms are similarly 'dead', and I've been puzzled by the tiny diameter of the outlet on some of the Cliftophone soundboxes too, yet they've worked well enough on the machines they were originally fitted to. Weird, but then the later Cliftophone horns were unusual too, a kind of reflector hybrid. To my mind this reinforces the view that the acoustic impedance matching between soundbox and horn is more critical with some designs than others. Cliftophone seem to have gone a long way up a blind alley on that one! They were pretty inventive, that's for sure - attached is a list of patents I compiled some years ago (undoubtedly incomplete).