Timestep reproducer vs recording acoustically

[dzavracky]

I want to invest some money into digitizing my cylinder record collection, and would like to hear what you guys have to say.

Would it be better to buy the timestep reproducer (which I may add is pretty expensive ) and record directly into the computer? Or invest in a nice microphone (maybe a large diaphragm condenser) and record the records with the mic at the opening of the horn? If I go this route... I may try to find a model R reproducer for the 4 min cylinders.

Any thoughts would be much appreciated.

David

[PeterF]

Depends on what you are trying to accomplish. Most cylinders are already available online through the various archives, recorded and cleaned up better than you probably can do.

If you want to hear all the music on the record, play it electronically. If you want the authentic experience, play it acoustically.

The only ones you “need” to record are the one-off home recordings and perhaps any brown wax cylinders. Otherwise why not just play them on a phonograph when you want to hear them?

[dzavracky]

I have a few old iPhones that I erased and turned into iPods. I started out by recording some of my 78’s (a little over 3,000 ) and moved them onto the phones. This way I can listen to my records while I drive around in my car, or even walking around on my college campus.
The main reason I did this was to make my own playlists. One of the things I enjoy collecting is big band 78’s. So if I ever want to listen to all of my Glenn Miller 78’s while doing homework, I can just queue them up and listen to them all. (I have a turntable I can run into my computer).

So I want to be able to listen to my cylinder records in the same manner. I already recorded all my 2 min records onto cassette tapes and recorded the tapes into the computer. But that was a lot of work and I don’t have a nice mic so the recordings just sound okay.

David

[PeterF]

Ok for that kind of deal, perhaps the easiest way is to find high quality recordings online at the archives or YouTube and compile them, then fill any gaps with the acoustic method.

You can get a good quality mic, with USB interface, to record directly to your mac or peecee and avoid that cassette step. They are cheap on Amazon.

[dzavracky]

I am not really interested in taking the copies off of the archive though. I want to record my copies and listen to them (which all the records in the herzog I just got are in super good shape anyways).

David

[barnettrp21122]

I vote for the timestep!
Bob

[Curt A]

Where did you find a Timestep recorder?

[dzavracky]

If you google it it will be pop up. The website sells lots of other audio equipment. The reproducer is $495...

David

[Curt A]

It looks like a copy of an "Act II" reproducer at a $200 higher price...
http://www.nipperhead.com/old/act/

[Curt A]

David,
These two reproducers/electronic recorders may be reasonably simple to make with your 3D printer skills. It is basically a housing that fits into the carriage eye of an Edison cylinder player. The housing holds a modern cartridge mounted on a leaf spring. The whole assembly fits the carriage like a standard Edison reproducer. I have attached a pic of the bottom of the housing with the cartridge mounted in it. Just a thought...
http://www.christerhamp.se/phono/lomas-rev.html

Screen Shot 2021-04-22 at 8.39.31 PM.png (453.28 KiB) Viewed 478 times

http://www.christerhamp.se/phono/lomas-rev.html