A Brunswick dilemma... could use a bit of expert advice

[Tinkerbell]

As some of you may already know, I just found an excellent condition solid brass tone arm and Ultona reproducer for a steal of a price, which I am considering using as replacements for the existing (poor condition) pot metal tone arm and 2 reproducers that came with my Brunswick machine.

While the holes in the Ultona tone arm base line up with the existing holes in the cabinet WITHOUT the flange installed, (my apologies if this is the incorrect terminology for the part... I refer here to the pipe which extends from the tone arm base down into the neck of the horn), attaching the flange to the base shifts the seating/centering of the base to where the screw holes no longer line up.

I did mount it temporarily without the flange, and it works beautifully. However, I am guessing the purpose of that flange is probably for stability and reinforcement (since these tone arms are soooo heavy), so I would not want to mount it permanently without it. Of course, feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

Anyway, the bottom line is that I haven't yet decided if I wish to fill the existing holes and redrill for this tone arm, or sell this brass tone arm and Ultona reproducer (which given it's condition, I should have NO problem doing) and look to replace the original equipment.

I suppose it boils down to this... pot metal original or solid brass/non pot metal replacement with newly drilled holes. Pictures of the original equipment and new replacement follow.

Advice? What would you do?

[OrthoSean]

I'm a little unclear about what you mean by flange, honestly! If the base of the Ultona replacement fits into the base of the old one (?) and nothing seems to be dragging or stressed, I'd say use it! I'd hate to see you alter the cabinet if you didn't have to. Personally, I'd still keep looking for an original arm. They're out there on eBay, I've seen them (cheap, too!). Same with the two original reproducers. I guess yours are kind of shot, but replacements are out there, you could email Geroge Vollema and see if he has them, if anyone does, he would. victrola "AT" triton "dot" net will get you in touch with him. He's a great guy to deal with!

Hope this helps.
Sean

[Tinkerbell]

Okay, this is a picture of another Brunswick ultona tone arm (since I don't want to dig out my camera right now), but see the pipe extending from the base under the elbow? That is the "flange" to which I make reference. As I say, I am not fluent in phono-speak.

I actually have been in touch with George V, however, having been sick for the past week and a half has made me rather foggy-brained and unable to think clearly... so I told him I'd get back with him once I make a decision on which route to take, (i.e., whether or not to have him try to hunt down an original replacement).

Anyway, hope this picture helps to depict what I am probably not clearly conveying...

[OrthoSean]

OK, gotcha!

So it fits that way. Do two of the three screw holes line up, perhaps? You may be able to make it work that way as a temporary thing as long as it's tight and flush to the motorboard all the way around. Then you wouldn't have to drill and all that until you can decide what to do....

Sean

[Tinkerbell]

OK, gotcha!

So it fits that way. Do two of the three screw holes line up, perhaps?

Perhaps in a parallel universe! Hence, my dilemma...

The plus side:

Solid brass, and honestly, near perfect for it's age
Sounds great
New drill holes would be covered by tone arm base

The down side:

Not original
New drill holes (hidden perhaps, but only from sight... not from my knowledge)

[OrthoSean]

I know what you mean...

If it were mine, I'd try like heck to find nice original replacements. I'd also hang onto that tonearm you have already (the brass one). That's a late one, off one of the high end machines from early 1925. I have the same one on my Brunswick-Radiola 260, it's solid, no pot metal in sight and you may end up with a Brunswick you could use that on in the future.

Of course, I'm speculating, but that's my $.02!

Sean

[Tinkerbell]

Thank you, Sean, for your input. It's much appreciated.

[Brad]

I'll jump in here Tink.

I am a little confused. (First, not nit-picking , but this may help the discussion - A flange is rim or lip around something that is used to add strength. Wiki flange for the definition. So the base with the three screw holes is technically a flange.)

Now, the tone arm that passes through the base should be concentrically centered on the base. This fits into the hole in the cabinet that leads to the horn. By your description, it sounds like when you place the new tone arm in place the base does not land on the same part of the cabinet. Is that correct?

I would expect it to land in the same concentric zone and be either exactly the same diameter, or larger diameter which would completely cover any evidence of the old base, or be smaller than the old base resulting in the possibility that there would be evidence in the finish of the cabinet remaining visible.

If it is the former, then you should be able to drill new holes without any visible evidence that you did. You can go back to an original tone arm later if you wish. If, on the other hand, the holes are just offset, you would need to fill the old holes as you mentioned. Same deal here, there is no visible evidence of your mod and you can go back later.

If it is the later (visible cabinet evidence), then I would lean to NOT using the new tone arm.

If there is no visible evidence, I would certainly consider using such a nice tone arm. The really nice ones are not too common to come by and will show your machine well.

As to the "do I keep it original, or modify it?" debate, I personally do not see any issue with implementing a mod that does not visibly damage the cabinet since it can be backed out later if desired. Also, If the machine in question is not rare, or highly collectible, I would consider modification for the purpose of enjoying your machine. As collectors, we come across machines that have been modified all the time. Interesting observation: If the mod is of recent history, we generally have issue with it. If the mod is of ancient history, we tend to celebrate it as part of the machines history. What is to say in a hundred years from now, your Brunswick with the nice tone arm would be considered a detraction?

Sorry for the long post, but I would not see any issue using the nice tone arm given the above.

[Tinkerbell]

Interesting observation: If the mod is of recent history, we generally have issue with it. If the mod is of ancient history, we tend to celebrate it as part of the machines history. What is to say in a hundred years from now, your Brunswick with the nice tone arm would be considered a detraction?

Sorry for the long post, but I would not see any issue using the nice tone arm given the above.

Very good points, Brad, and I think you (and others) have helped me to look at it in quite a different light. As the drill holes would be completely hidden, I suppose I do not need to be quite so, well... (I'll use a different word than I normally would here) "rententive" about it.

I'm thinking I will redrill for the new tone arm, but keep an eye out for original parts in the event I ever decide to part with the machine and somebody else's preference would be as originally designed... and you're right, while this may be a very early Brunswick, it certainly isn't rare (to my knowledge).

Besides, this tonearm and reproducer does sound very sweet!!