A-150 Question

[JohnM]

Agree, interesting topic. Someone could easily write a three part article just on the topic of these early A series machines.

Oh sure - - and suffer the slings and arrows of the Victor crowd! I think I'd better steer clear of Edison machines for awhile...!

George P.

It is somewhat irksome to me when people advocate one brand over another like they were football teams or political parties. These brands did not exist in a vacuum! Edison influenced Victor, Victor influenced Edison. Then factor in Columbia and everyone else. How can one ignore entire segments of the talking machine industry just to have a favorite brand? I don't get it! Write any article you want, George . . . it's a free country!

[Valecnik]

To John's point, one of the most interesting facets of the hobby is learning about and observing how they all struggled to get around and fought over eachother's patents.

The Amberola 1 and the first diamond disc machines for example would have looked a lot different had they not been forced to design around simple patents, like hinged doors over covering the horn.

Look at the dual feedscrew design and reproducer design of US Junior, Opera, et cetera. Surely must have been designed to avoid trouble with Edison. I guess they were not so successful at that.

[JohnM]

Look at the dual feedscrew design and reproducer design of US Junior, Opera, et cetera. Surely must have been designed to avoid trouble with Edison. I guess they were not so successful at that.

US did manage to force Edison to drop the 'Opera' name because they claimed prior use. That is why the 'Opera' became the 'Concert'.

[phonogfp]

John,
I agree with you of course. But my last 3 article HAVE dealt with Edison - - and only one particular model at that! In the interest of variety, I really should till a different field for awhile.

As to your (and Bruce's) point that various manufacturers/designers did not exist in a vacuum, I agree strongly on that point. When Tim and I began talking about writing our first book, Tim envisioned writing chapters on Victor, Columbia, Edison, etc. I vehemently disagreed. That had all been done before, and it's an artificial catagorization. The early industry evolved over time, and I felt strongly that we should approach the subject chronologically. In no other way can one appreciate, for example, how much Columbia was offering in 1897, and how little Edison was offering at the same time. I even went so far as to break out the years 1894-1903 separately in chapters Two and Three. So much was happening so rapidly during that period, I find it fascinating to examine in "snapshots" of particular years.

However, I recognize that not all phonograph collectors are historians, or care about the broader history of the industry beyond a particular brand. I know people who collect only cylinder machines; others only disc machines. Some collect only a particular brand. I don't need to understand how such restrictions can satisfy a collector, but it's quite obvious they sometimes do. My esteemed co-author wonders how I can collect only American-made machines. We're all different, aren't we?

Thanks for your support, and I'll try to keep everyone happy!

George P.

[JohnM]

We're all different, aren't we?

Yeah, we're all snowflakes.

[phonogfp]

Yeah, we're all snowflakes.

Well, you're half-right!!

George P.

[tinker]

So, if anyone was interested in one of the 78 Attachments with the original felt sound control mechanism for and Edison machine shown in this string, give me a should at [email protected]. They were made by "Union" and are called the Union number two. The one I have available is nickel plated, and complete with the correct original Union reproducer. Pictures and details available upon request. Shawn