Edison C, H & K Reproducers Compared
-
- Victor Jr
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 11:06 am
Edison C, H & K Reproducers Compared
My Edison 2/4 minute Home Phonograph has both the Model C and H reproducers. How does the sound quality of these compare to a model K reproducer, which can be switched for either 2 or 4 minute cylinders?
- FellowCollector
- Victor IV
- Posts: 1938
- Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 7:22 pm
- Contact:
Re: Edison C, H & K Reproducers Compared
Sound should be the same (all things considered: good styli, good diaphragms, etc.) since the diaphragms, tops, styli are the same.
Doug
Doug
-
- Victor Jr
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 11:06 am
Re: Edison C, H & K Reproducers Compared
What is a fair price for a good model K reproducer these days?
-
- Victor Monarch Special
- Posts: 8516
- Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 11:25 am
- Personal Text: Stop for a visit when in Oregon.
- Location: Albany, Oregon
Re: Edison C, H & K Reproducers Compared
I agree with Doug. With all three reproducers in good shape they should sound terrific. But remember that the K was standard equipment on the lowest priced Edisons, the Model D Gem and the Fireside A. It cost less to make one K compared to the total cost of a C and H which were standard equipment on the Standard and better Edison models. There must have been a reason. Maybe it was more difficult to keep the K properly adjusted. Maybe under laboratory conditions the C and H performed a click better but there must be a reason.
Jerry B.
Jerry B.
- phonogfp
- Victor Monarch Special
- Posts: 7402
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 5:08 pm
- Personal Text: "If you look for the bad in people expecting to find it, you surely will." - A. Lincoln
- Location: New York's Finger Lakes
Re: Edison C, H & K Reproducers Compared
I'd hazard a guess that the reason the Model K was less expensive was because it used only one tube plate, one weight, one hinge, and required about half the labor to manufacture.Jerry B. wrote: ↑Sun Jan 23, 2022 4:31 pm I agree with Doug. With all three reproducers in good shape they should sound terrific. But remember that the K was standard equipment on the lowest priced Edisons, the Model D Gem and the Fireside A. It cost less to make one K compared to the total cost of a C and H which were standard equipment on the Standard and better Edison models. There must have been a reason. Maybe it was more difficult to keep the K properly adjusted. Maybe under laboratory conditions the C and H performed a click better but there must be a reason.
Jerry B.
George P.
-
- Victor Monarch Special
- Posts: 8516
- Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 11:25 am
- Personal Text: Stop for a visit when in Oregon.
- Location: Albany, Oregon
Re: Edison C, H & K Reproducers Compared
I agree completely but if everything is totally equal why not make it standard equipment on all Edison models? Manufacturing costs could have been reduced as well as retail machine prices or increases in profit margins.I'd hazard a guess that the reason the Model K was less expensive was because it used only one tube plate, one weight, one hinge, and required about half the labor to manufacture.
Jerry B.
- Valecnik
- Victor VI
- Posts: 3829
- Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 3:28 pm
- Personal Text: Edison Records - Close your eyes and see if the artist does not actually seem to be before you.
- Location: Česká Republika
- Contact:
Re: Edison C, H & K Reproducers Compared
I don't think that the K is fully comparable in quality with the C & H. I would say close but not equal. On the K, the stylus bars are more prone to misalignment causing record damage, especially on wax records. The K is also less tolerant of slightly out of round records than the H and a little more prone to skipping. Over time you may notice a few records which do not play properly with the K but will play okay with the C or H. Even a perfectly adjusted K on a perfectly shaped record does not sound quite as good as the C or H. It's not a big difference but if you do a side by side comparison of the same record you will notice a slight difference.
- fran604g
- Victor VI
- Posts: 3988
- Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2013 2:22 pm
- Personal Text: I'm Feeling Cranky
- Location: Hemlock, NY
Re: Edison C, H & K Reproducers Compared
I agree completely. In my very limited experience, the difference in SQ was immediately noticeable for me when I swapped out a C and H for a K (all 3 impeccably rebuilt).Valecnik wrote: ↑Mon Jan 24, 2022 3:24 am I don't think that the K is fully comparable in quality with the C & H. I would say close but not equal. On the K, the stylus bars are more prone to misalignment causing record damage, especially on wax records. The K is also less tolerant of slightly out of round records than the H and a little more prone to skipping. Over time you may notice a few records which do not play properly with the K but will play okay with the C or H. Even a perfectly adjusted K on a perfectly shaped record does not sound quite as good as the C or H. It's not a big difference but if you do a side by side comparison of the same record you will notice a slight difference.
Francis; "i" for him, "e" for her
"Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while" - the unappreciative supervisor.
"Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while" - the unappreciative supervisor.
- phonogfp
- Victor Monarch Special
- Posts: 7402
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 5:08 pm
- Personal Text: "If you look for the bad in people expecting to find it, you surely will." - A. Lincoln
- Location: New York's Finger Lakes
Re: Edison C, H & K Reproducers Compared
Now I see your point.Jerry B. wrote: ↑Sun Jan 23, 2022 11:05 pmI agree completely but if everything is totally equal why not make it standard equipment on all Edison models? Manufacturing costs could have been reduced as well as retail machine prices or increases in profit margins.I'd hazard a guess that the reason the Model K was less expensive was because it used only one tube plate, one weight, one hinge, and required about half the labor to manufacture.
Jerry B.
Since the Model K didn't appear until mid-1909, and the larger-diameter reproducers (the N and the O) were introduced soon thereafter, there may have been the belief in West Orange that the smaller-diameter reproducers should be phased out altogether without more widespread use of the Model K. The larger-diameter Model S (which uses the same dual stylus bar/styli of the K) was briefly supplied with the Standard, which suggests that the folks at Edison didn't think the design was substandard (see what I did there?). In short, it may have been the larger-diameter reproducers that limited the Model K's application more than any inherent design flaws.
George P.
-
- Victor Jr
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:25 pm
Re: Edison C, H & K Reproducers Compared
I have found the clarity between the model K and model R reproduces to be almost identical. In my experience the overall volume is louder on the model R, which would be expected.
I haven't tried the model N out yet, keen to compare
I haven't tried the model N out yet, keen to compare