Hi! I have a 1928 HMV101. I also have a lot of 40s and 50s records. Am I able to play these as normal or do I need a different type of needle?
Thanks!
Playing late 40s and 50s records on HMV 101.
-
- Victor Jr
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2022 11:51 am
- alang
- VTLA
- Posts: 3115
- Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 9:36 am
- Personal Text: TMF Moderator
- Location: Delaware
Re: Playing late 40s and 50s records on HMV 101.
Most 40s shellac records you should be OK using soft tone needles and changing the needle after each side. With 50s records it becomes more of a mixed bag. Hard thicker (shellac) records should be OK, but any flexible record (vinyl) should only be played with a modern record player. You may still experience blasting and distortion on very loud or broad frequency recordings, because starting in the late 1920s recording was done through microphones and no longer acoustically. I would not play valuable records on your machine, because the heavy reproducer and steel needle will cause more records wear. Purists will not play any record later than the mid 1930s on an acoustical player, but for run of the mill shellac 78s I have ever experienced any issues.
Andreas
Andreas
-
- Victor O
- Posts: 87
- Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 9:40 am
- Personal Text: ARSC Discography Committee Chairperson and early recorded sound enthusiast based in Central NJ
Re: Playing late 40s and 50s records on HMV 101.
I personally wouldn’t feel comfortable playing post 1925 78s on an accustic phonograph, but have seen people play records made up to the mid 1930s with no issue on them as long at they changed the needle with every playback and used high quality needles.
- mrrgstuff
- Victor I
- Posts: 160
- Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2020 6:27 am
- Location: The south of England
Re: Playing late 40s and 50s records on HMV 101.
I'm sure a fair bit of personal preference is going to come is to this, and there is certainly more risk of damaging the record on an older machine, not least because you might drop the soundbox onto the record by accident!
However, isn't there also the aspect of where the records were made, or to put it another way, the composition of the records? My understanding is that in the US the composition became softer quite rapidly after the introduction of electric reproduction as there was no need for the record to wear the needle in quite the same way, and it reduced surface noise. In the UK though, electric reproduction took longer to get established and the record composition stayed much the same, or at least similar for longer. So there may be more surface noise, but these later UK records don't wear as much on an accoustic machine.
I'm sure I am oversimplifing the history here
Thanks
However, isn't there also the aspect of where the records were made, or to put it another way, the composition of the records? My understanding is that in the US the composition became softer quite rapidly after the introduction of electric reproduction as there was no need for the record to wear the needle in quite the same way, and it reduced surface noise. In the UK though, electric reproduction took longer to get established and the record composition stayed much the same, or at least similar for longer. So there may be more surface noise, but these later UK records don't wear as much on an accoustic machine.
I'm sure I am oversimplifing the history here
Thanks
- epigramophone
- Victor Monarch Special
- Posts: 5235
- Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 1:21 pm
- Personal Text: An analogue relic trapped in a digital world.
- Location: The Somerset Levels, UK.
Re: Playing late 40s and 50s records on HMV 101.
Given the choice, compilers of CD reissues of 78rpm records have been known to use Victor pressings in preference to HMV.
HMV are believed to have used a higher percentage of abrasive in their material, resulting in increased surface noise.
HMV are believed to have used a higher percentage of abrasive in their material, resulting in increased surface noise.