Edison Amberola 1A in Dover NH

[marcapra]

I also just bought an Amberola 1A in oak with the gunmetal mechanism. Mine comes with a diamond A reproducer. I already have a Diamond A rep. on my Opera and I also own an L. I'm told you can easily covert an L to an M by changing the weight and the styli with parts from an O. My cabinet also has some issues with a light oak finish on the outside and a dark oak finish on the inside. I'm thinking it over whether to lighten the inside or darken the outside. And I guess unless you are very finicky, there is nothing wrong with leaving the outside light and the inside dark finish. any ideas?

Oh, and if anyone has a keyhole escutcheon, please send me a PM. Thanks, Marc.

[phonojim]

Very nice 1A. Those are really stunning in oak, but I personally prefer mahogany simply because I don't care for the gunmetal finish on the castings - not that I would have turned down an oak one at the right price.
You can use the weight from an O to turn an L into an M, but it is not a direct fit because of the limit loop position. On an M, the loop is all the way out at the end of the weight tail, while an O has the loop further back towards the body of the reproducer. When I made the conversion I removed the limit loop from the O weight and made a new loop which mounted in the existing holes on the O weight. I bent the wire such that it came up out of the holes then ran forward along the top of the weight to the end of the tail where I bent it up to form the loop. I know that this sounds complicated, but it's not really. I have since acquired and installed an M weight, so the first conversion no longer exists. It seems like I have a photo somewhere, maybe on another computer or I may have the madeup loop in a parts drawer. If I can find either one, I will post a the photo for you. I realize that I could have drilled the O weight and simply moved the loop,but I didn't want to do that.

Jim

[52089]

I'm told you can easily covert an L to an M by changing the weight and the styli with parts from an O.

Yes, but why would you? If you have an L and an O, why not sell them to someone who would use them as is and use the funds towards an M?

[Steve Levi]

JLH- Congratulations on your purchase and I would also like to see the before and after photos. I am sure you are already enjoying it! Marcapra- I would leave your machine just as it is. I don't think the difference from inside to outside is a big deal. It is a handsome machine as it is. Just my thoughts gentlemen. Steve

[marcapra]

Thanks, Jim, Steve, and 52 for your excellent comments. As far as the conversion of the L question, I also have access to the weight and styli from a Q. I guess a Q is different than an O? I have looked for an M reproducer and put up want ads for an M reproducer with no replies. The lack of an M made me hesitate on buying this machine in the first place. Many oak 1A's also came with brown motor boards. Yes the gun metal option looks a bit plainer than the painted and striped finish, but I was told that the gun metal finish makes the machine somewhat more collectable. I like both painted and gun metal finishes. What is your opinion as to how this 1A got this way? I don't really think that air, or the sun could lighten the finish like that. Obviously, this machine was probably refinished long ago! I say that due to the the ageing of the outside finish. The previous owner even thinks that it could have been refinished as long ago as 1911 or 1912 to cater to a customer who wanted a lighter finish. Possibly far-fetched, but possibly true. I don't know if a dealer would do that back then, but maybe to get a sale?

[52089]

As far as the conversion of the L question, I also have access to the weight and styli from a Q. I guess a Q is different than an O?

The Q reproducer is a fairly rare bird. According to Frow, the early O reproducer had a weight that was too heavy, and owners could turn them in to get the weights trimmed down from round to trowel-shaped. When that happened, the O was overstamped with a Q.

If I had those Q parts, I would be tempted to reunite them with an O body, preferably original, but reproductions are also available.

And yes, the M is quite hard to find, especially since the only machine that takes full advantage of its capabilities is the Amberola 1A. I actually bought my M a full year before I bought my 1A! (And I found out later that the stylus selector knob and post almost certainly came from an O...)

[rgordon939]

I wish I had it those "Q" parts I would definitely match them up with an original "O" body. One reproducer I've never found.

Rich Gordon

[phonojim]

I found the photo of my first conversion, see below. The reason I crimped the limit loop into the weight is that I wasn't sure how well it would work and this way I could just reinstall the O loop if it didn't.

Jim

[marcapra]

Very good! How well did this arrangement work and how did it sound compared to an M?

[phonojim]

It works quite well, although I had to do some careful adjusting to the length of the stylus bar link to get proper contact between stylus and record surface. The link on the O is slightly longer so it requires adjustment and trial to get it correct. The 4 minute side is especially touchy. I haven't done a direct comparison with an M, but it does sound like I would expect from an M. A friend has an M which I have heard many times, so I am familiar with the sound of an M in a 1A. Perhaps the next time we get together, I will take my L/M along and do a comparison. From what I can see, an M and O are the same except for the body - diaphragm, weight and stylus bar assembly.
Another possibility is to install a bar and stylus from a C reproducer in place of the 4 minute one on the L. It played 2 minute cylinders very well, although I still couldn't play 4 minute wax cylinders. However, that wouldn't really have mattered because I usually play 4 minute wax with an S or a trowel weight O.

Jim