modifying columbia tone arm for better tracking

[mikejk]

I am not good with knowing how to work on metals. Can the sound box coupling flange on this Columbia tone arm be loosened and removed by heating? Will the nickel plate prevent it? My idea is to move the coupling flange farther back on the curve, turning the sound box for better tracking. Can this be done?

Thanks,
Mike

[De Soto Frank]

From what I've seen of broken arms in e-bay, some of these Columbia arms are drawn brass-tube, others seem to be pot-metal castings ?

I would NOT make my first attempt on a good arm...

Try to find one where the back end is damaged beyond repair and use that for your guinea-pig...

That said, I think the reproducer end is soldered to the taper-tube, so there MIGHT be a chance of heating enough to melt the solder, adjust the angle, then let-cool and see how it is...

You might be ahead of the game to fashion a connector adapter to go between the original arm and the reproducer head, improving the angle with the new part.


I've been pondering how to achieve the same improvement, as I like my Grafonolas too much to not play them...

[mikejk]

De soto Frank,
Thanks, I will heed your advice. I wouldn't want to ruin a perfectly good arm. The first ideas that came to me were to fashion an angled rubber connector to insert into the flange. This may give not only a better angle, but the benefit of a rubber insulator between the arm and sound box that the Columbia's don't have. I guess you have also noted how miserable the tracking is on these Columbia's ?

Thanks, Mike

[De Soto Frank]

De soto Frank,
Thanks, I will heed your advice. I wouldn't want to ruin a perfectly good arm. The first ideas that came to me were to fashion an angled rubber connector to insert into the flange. This may give not only a better angle, but the benefit of a rubber insulator between the arm and sound box that the Columbia's don't have. I guess you have also noted how miserable the tracking is on these Columbia's ?

Thanks, Mike

Mike,

I have NOT made a close examination of the tracking on Grafonolae, but having the little "Jewel" table-top ( their $35 machine ), which has the taper-tube anchored in the corner of the motorboard, and several uprights, which have the taper-tube anchored at the rear-center, like an acoustic Victrola, the corner-mount G-fonolas seem to have worse tracking angles...

I am working on an E-5 upright today, and have just managed to break the reroducer head off its mounting nipple , and can now somewhat definitively say ( as much as one can with the house of Columbia ) that the taper-arm itself is brass, while the reproducer head, and rear elbow that connects the motorboard and taper-tube are pot-metal.

So, I am sitting here, with a fine-tooth hacksaw blade, carefully sawing two slots from the inside > out of the pot-metal reproducer nipple, to collapse it, and get it out of the arm.

I'm NOT loving Columbia at the moment...

Frank

[mikejk]

Frank,

Oh boy! Any colorful language? Owning and working on Columbias can be a love/hate situation. I can sympathize with your plight, I have had to deal with many frozen Columbia joints.

The C-2 lidded table model is the one I have, and is a nice small machine, but it too has the tone arm base mounted in the corner of the cabinet. This is ok but, the cabinet is small and this allows the reproducer and needle point to extend well beyond the center spindle creating an awlful tracking error. This reproducer begs to be turned, or it certainly needs a shorter tone arm.

My other Columbia is a small burled walnut upright, and with the tone arm base in the center, it too suffers the same off tracking but maybe not as severe as the table model. I am going to keep working on making things a little better with tracking on these Columbias.

Good luck, Mike

[De Soto Frank]

Mike,

Thanks for the encouragement...

I did look at the arc between the tone-arm and record spindle on the E-5, and the needle-arc falls short of the spindle.

I'll check-on my "Jewel" and see how the needle-sweep of that is... I think the C-2 is the alpha-numeric successor to the "Jewel" ?


I did manage to get the reproducer-stub out of the arm... I swapped-on a Columbia #6 from another machine, and it plays decently enough.

I'll start a new thread later-on with pics...

Frank

[estott]

If it ain't broke don't fix it!. If you are all that concerned with proper tracking on records get a different machine or play them on a modern one.

Frank's machine may indeed have a brass arm, but in my experience Columbia arms are likely to be 100% pot metal. Chances are that if you attempt to modify it you're going to spoil the plating at best or even ruin the arm.

[De Soto Frank]

I think the safest way to tweak a Columbia angle is with some sort of "bridge adapter" between the arm and reproducer...

They don't lend themselves to hot-rodding as easily as Victor...

[mikejk]

Thanks guys.
The tone arms on my Columbias are indeed brass with the pot metal #6 reproducer. Spoiling the plating was one of my concerns along with the possibility of destroying the arm altogether. I will not mess with the arm, but will try to develop a rubber adapter.

Please don't get the wrong idea, I am not into altering original parts on my phonographs. There are plenty of them in the house of all different makes to play records on, and they ALL have the same off tracking problem, including the Victor products. If something can be done to improve the situation, I feel why not do it and help the records out a little.

Thanks for the help, Mike

[Phonofreak]

My experiences with Grafonolas 1915 onward have tracking problems. The one size arm is usually too short. If the record plays decently and sounds good, I would leave it alone. That's the way they came from the factory. I don't think Grafonolas have the same quality as a Victor. I would use a Grafonola to play an occasional record. For serious playing, I would use a Victor.
Harvey Kravitz