The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

Here's some interesting reading regarding Greg's experience with the 10-35.
Scroll about halfway down for his article:

http://myvintagetv.com/updatepages1/103 ... r_1035.htm

Bob

Gosh, I miss Greg Bogantz's written work! He had a few articles on another board that I printed and saved (they're here someplace). He had a great informative and entertaining way with his topics. The above referenced review of his work with the 10-35 is a great reminder.

barnettrp21122 wrote:Here's some interesting reading regarding Greg's experience with the 10-35.
Scroll about halfway down for his article:

http://myvintagetv.com/updatepages1/103 ... r_1035.htm

Bob

I forgot that was Greg. The description is QUITE melodramatic. As I said, these machines are over- engineered and tedious, but the key is being methodical, calm and focused, and not being in a hurry. I disagree with leaving "redundant" parts out- often these parts serve purposes that non- engineers would never figure out.

I DO agree that, with modern greases, shellac plus grease probably isn't needed to seal the sound channel.

Take what I am saying along with the fact that I have been a classic Mercedes/ Porsche/ VW restorer for decades. Above I compared the 10-35 changer to a Mercedes M-100 engine. Here's what one of those looks like:



Massive, heavy, overbuilt, and over- engineered for sure. Yet, like a simple VW, it's all nuts, bolts, tolerances, and torques in the end. Take your time and don't assume anything, or worse- try to out- engineer the engineers, and you'll be fine. Don't "just accept" anything as "good enough" if you've already got it all apart. Do it once and do it right because you do NOT want to do it over.

You'll work and work and work and work, then suddenly notice you're out of parts! All that's left then are minor adjustments and you're good for many years. DO do the recommended maintenance at the recommended intervals, though. I have the 1941 Rider changer manual that covers all these oldies if you want a scan of that section. But seriously, reach out to Carlton as his diagrams that come with his rubber/ leather replacement sets are far more legible.

But again, if this was indeed Greg's machine, there's a better than 75% chance all is already done and still perfectly functional.

Just for the record guys, I'm a different Greg. But anybody who buys this machine is welcome to contact me about the changer. It's complicated but if you stare at it long enough it just maybe starts to make sense.

Kirkwood wrote:Gosh, I miss Greg Bogantz's written work!

yep me too! I corresponded with Greg via email over a ten year period and I still have all his emails. Not only was he entertaining in his writing but also incredibly informative about all kind of topics. He also had a good way of communicating detailed knowledge in an easy to understand form - he is very much missed.

gramophone-georg wrote:

pallophotophone wrote:

pallophotophone wrote:Are there any potential pot metal nasties laying in ambush ? Or was pot metal not used in this machine? And any idea of how shippable this is, weight wise ? MANY THANKS for any info !!

Hat's in the ring ! I've always wanted an orthophonic with a metal horn. Maybe it's my time.

Many Thanks !!

You won't regret it. Check all the wiring and contact Carlton (Electrolaman) about a replacement rubber kit and service info, as well as tips on how to renew the "grab" of the turntable which is necessary for proper changing without shattering records.


Well Carlton (Electrolaman) is going to the Stanton auction and just might like this 10-35 for himself. Greg was a very close personal friend.

Tally Ho!

Who won this beauty?

GregVTLA wrote:Who won this beauty?

Well, it was not my time. I lost it a $950.00- final bid of $2,300.00 plus a 20% premium. But at least I was able to get the first bid in.

pallophotophone wrote:

GregVTLA wrote:Who won this beauty?

Well, it was not my time. I lost it a $950.00- final bid of $2,300.00 plus a 20% premium. But at least I was able to get the first bid in.

Ouch! Personally, I'd rather loose by a mile than by 1 bid.

JerryVan wrote:

pallophotophone wrote:

GregVTLA wrote:Who won this beauty?

Well, it was not my time. I lost it a $950.00- final bid of $2,300.00 plus a 20% premium. But at least I was able to get the first bid in.

Ouch! Personally, I'd rather loose by a mile than by 1 bid.

I couldn't agree more ! I hope whomever won it will enjoy it. But then how could they not?