Why Cant I Play My Bluebird Records with a Victor No.2?

[hearsedriver]

Can someone explain why I cant use a Victor No.2 while playing my late 30's , early 40's Bluebird records? Ive done it and they sound fine to me. I know you are not suppose to use a No.2 or Exhibition on electrically recorded records but, I haven't been able to find a reason why.

[RolandVV-360]

They'll only sound good for the first couple of plays, but then they will wear faster, due to not being manufactured for the tracking force of the tone arm. I suggest you don't play those records again on your machine. Leave them for the hifi or a 40s-60s portable.

(A good rule of thumb is to only play pre-1935 records on a phonograph)

[Uncle Vanya]

The Victrola No. 2 is not sufficiently compliant to play these later records safely. It would be helped if the rubber back were replaced with very soft silicone, but it is better to use a reproducer designed for electical records.

The big Palliard reproducers used by Sonora (marketed as their "Superfine Sound Box") can be made quite compliant. These reproducers will not only wear records far less, but they will evince a greater breadth and depth of tone in their reproduction. The HMV No. 23 reproducer (which can be found with HMV, Columbia, Pathé, Electrola or no badge) is an excellent substitute for a No. 2, particularly on an open horn machine with a reasoably large air chamber.

[hearsedriver]

So, is it the weight of the reproducer that causes the wear or the stiffness of the needle? Honestly, In have played one of my Bluebirds at least 25 times with no sound degradation that I can hear. I do change the needle after every play though.

[OrthoFan]

So, is it the weight of the reproducer that causes the wear or the stiffness of the needle?

The "stiffness" is more due to the fact that the Exhibition and #2 needle bar fulcrum relies on flat springs to hold everything in place. There is considerably more tension in the fulcrum--or resistance to needle-bar movement--than provided by later designs, which dispensed with the knife-edge fulcrum altogether. (In the UK, a knife-edge fulcrum was still used for some high-end sound boxes, but the springs were redesigned to ensure maximum flexibility.)

In addition to the tracking force, as Roland noted, and the needle bar's compliance (Uncle Vanya) there's the issue of the tonearm's offset angle, and the fact that earlier, pre-1935 pressing, according to many sources--(Google: abrasive groove 78s)--contained abrasive material in the groove to wear the needle tip to conformity.

Along this line, a cheaper, more fragile grade of material was used in the early 1940s, which incorporated some recycled "shellac" from older records. (SEE: https://blogs.loc.gov/now-see-hear/2015 ... r-victory/ )

If you prefer to use an Exhibition or #2 sound box, your best bet would probably to stock up on some bamboo (triangular) needles or thorn needles (if you can find them). They do a great job, and minimize wear, and give the record a nice mellow tone on the pre-1925 Victrolas. Of course, the sound box must be in tip-top shape, equipped with fresh gaskets, etc.

OrthoFan

[hearsedriver]

Orthofan, I do like the tone of a bamboo needle. Ive got about 100 of them. How many times can you play a record with bamboo?
I also took a reproducer from a 40's portable and , using silicone and an old No.2 rubber mount, modified it to fit the older tone arms. I like the sound of it too. its super loud with good clarity. Would it be more compliant for electric records?

[OrthoFan]

Orthofan, I do like the tone of a bamboo needle. Ive got about 100 of them. How many times can you play a record with bamboo?
I also took a reproducer from a 40's portable and , using silicone and an old No.2 rubber mount, modified it to fit the older tone arms. I like the sound of it too. its super loud with good clarity. Would it be more compliant for electric records?

I've normally gotten about one or two plays per sharpening. As you probable know, you can re-sharpen a bamboo needle using a razor blade, or one of the special cutters (which come up for sale regularly on Ebay.) If you take off the tiniest bit, you can probably resharpen one about ten times, maybe more, before it is too short to use again.

--------

A sound box from a 1940s portable would probably work very well. If properly adjusted it should be more compliant.

OrthoFan

[Torjazzer]

One has to realize the difference between the two types of diaphragms: mica and aluminum. The mica diaphragm, such as that of the #2, worked because it only had to reproduce sound waves created by a limited source: the acoustic disc. It did not have to variate that much. However,an electrical disc demands more movement because it contains more information; it needs more movement from the diaphragm. The aluminum diaphragm allows for that movement whilst the mica diaphragm does not. Imagine a positive vs. negative force. The positive force is the groove pushing the stylus to move the diaphragm. The negative force is the resistance from the mica diaphragm. The negative force is stronger and the groove must submit to this dominance, hence the wear on the record.
Play your records on machines/reproducers in accordance with their period as that is how they were designed.

[OrthoFan]

One has to realize the difference between the two types of diaphragms: mica and aluminum. The mica diaphragm, such as that of the #2, worked because it only had to reproduce sound waves created by a limited source: the acoustic disc. It did not have to variate that much. However,an electrical disc demands more movement because it contains more information; it needs more movement from the diaphragm. The aluminum diaphragm allows for that movement whilst the mica diaphragm does not. Imagine a positive vs. negative force. The positive force is the groove pushing the stylus to move the diaphragm. The negative force is the resistance from the mica diaphragm. The negative force is stronger and the groove must submit to this dominance, hence the wear on the record.
Play your records on machines/reproducers in accordance with their period as that is how they were designed.

Many thanks for pointing that out -- something I totally overlooked.

Interestingly, about 30 years ago, I corresponded with a sound box repairman who also liked to experiment, and one of the things he did was to fit an aluminum diaphragm into a #2 sound box shell. (I think he said he trimmed down a Viva-Tonal diaphragm.) He used a conventional tube gasket for the front, a silicone bead (from caulk) in place of the back gasket, and installed slightly curved springs in place of the flat springs, to give the needle-bar fitting more compliance. He told me that when he tried it on his (homemade) "Credenza," it performed as well as an Orthophonic sound box when playing electrical recordings, and did a fantastic job with the acoustic records, as well. I hinted that he should send me one to try out on my Consolette (using an adapter) but by that time, he had moved on to experimenting with French-glass diaphragms, so I never got to hear it.

OrthoFan

[Uncle Vanya]

Remember that the first EMG reproducers were re-worked Exhibitions. That said, replacing the cross-tension springs used on the Exhibition or on the Victrola No. 2 with springs that simply keep the stylus bar pivots tight to the knife edges greatly improves effective needle point compliance. This modification, used along with a more compliant diaphragm suspension and a soft rubber connector to the tone arm greatly improve the reproduction of the No. 2. A properly modified No. 2 can so a suprising job when playing an electric record on an Orthophonic machine (I once fooled Paul Edie with this little trick), but an aluminum diaphragm is still better. If you are using, say a Tomon portable reproducer you must be certain that the rubber mount is very soft, that the diaphragm gaskets are also quite soft (try Victor Exhibition tubing on the rear and Silpat silicone rubber sheet on the front), and that the stylus bar pivot points are tight enough not to rattle but are loose enough to allow the stylus bar to vibrate with perfect freedom.

The alignment of a pre-1918 Victor machine may be improved somewhat by substituting the tone arm crook from a Victrola IX or Victrola X for the standard crook. the slightly offset crook improves the alignment of the long straight tone arm. You can be certain that record wear is at a bare minimum when there is no noticible black "fluff" on your finger tip after you rub it across a needle which has just been lifted from the last groove of a record.


Why not look for a nice Orthophonic machine? Anything short of a Credenza seems to be selling at quite a discount these days. A straight-horn machine, like a little Consolette, a Colony, or an early Granada will also play your acoustic era records with un-dreamed of brilliance and depth..