HMV 201

[Steve]

Reading the page about the Model 14, 200 and 201 (different successive machines utilising the same cabinet) in "HMG" it might appear that the 201 and 211 are very rare machines with just 23 201's sold in the UK and 5 211's (electric motor)! That's an incredibly small number.

It states that Hayes notified the Parisian division of the Gramophone Co. in January 1926 that they couldn't supply any 201s due to their preexisting stock allocation being taken up with unexpected UK orders.

If this is correct would anyone care to guess why the Parisian division produced a machine catalogue in October 1927, a full 21 months later, with the 201 included and available with price list?

I'm curious about this because I have just purchased a 201, being interested in that "stop gap" range of saxophone horn models HMV produced for just over a year.

Was communication between different arms of the Gramophone Company really that poor?

[Steve]

My latest addition has just arrived, complete with correct saxophone horn. This example is one out of probably about 14 mahogany 201s to be sold here in 1926.

[alang]

Beautiful machine, but that design must have looked like a blast from the past in 1926. It looks like a high end model Victor from the late teens. Very interesting that they used this type of case to add a saxophone horn that late. Congratulations on a rare find.

Andreas

[Steve]

Thank you Andreas!

Yes, it sounds like the Gramophone Company were truly surprised by the orders received through dealerships and these 201s were literally using up a handful of empty (or re-appropriated) cabinets at the factory left over from the Model 14 (Exhibition soundbox) and 200 (No. 2 soundbox).

They never made any more apparently so had to turn away the orders received after January 1926.

This still leaves my question as to why the French company was listing this model in catalogue as late as October 1927.

For my own purposes I like grand machines but I'm reluctant to buy one which doesn't perform as well as it looks. I figured at least with the saxophone horn this version of the cabinet must surely be the best performer of the three.

I'm currently rebuilding the soundbox. Serious auditioning starts later tonight!

[nostalgia]

Congratulations A great machine for sure to look at:))

[AZ*]

Congratulations, Steve!

I hope you enjoy it. I truly enjoy the HMV 211 that I purchased from Ian C. in 2004 (which is still shown on his website). Of course, while not in the same league with a large re-entrant or an EMG or Expert, it absolutely outperforms earlier Victor or HMV machines.

I agree with you that it really doesn't make sense that the 1927 French catalogue would show these gramophones unless the information in HMG is somehow erroneous.

Another interesting observation:

Although the HMV 14 & 200 cabinets were repurposed, the cabinets were modified quite a bit. In addition to the blanked off and modified record storage area, the upper doors were replaced with longer doors to cover a larger horn opening. The lower doors covering the record storage were shortened by cleanly sawing off a section at the bottom. There is no horizontal band of wood on the bottom of the lower doors as there is on the other 3 sides. It's just a raw edge. Also, any catalogue pictures I've seen of the 201/211 are simply reused from the 200. They do not show the larger doors covering the horn opening.

The machine pictured on p 87 of HMG is of an earlier machine (model 14 possibly) with the original smaller doors covering the horn opening.

[Steve]

Thanks, AZ.

It's a fantastic machine in my opinion. I spent an evening with it playing a variety of dynamic electrically recorded material and I'm very impressed so far.

As you say, it pales beside the 202 and my EMG Expert Senior in terms of sound quality but I'd say it can give everything else in my collection a run for it's money, including the very best horn machines, even my Pathés.

The standard internal horns were never considered a suitable replacement for external horns in the minds of the purists who wanted the last word in sound reproduction. They were always a compromise brought about by market trends and fashionable aesthetics or convenience. I liken it to CD in comparison to vinyl LP records. Convenience won over sound but in time the convenient choice improved considerably anyway but sound won out in the end in a late resurgence brought about by the purists fighting back with their no nonsense quest for no compromise. In this comparison that would be EMG with their large over-sized external horns and we know what's happened with vinyl records today.

The large saxophone horn is a significant step above the standard internal horn enroute to the re-entrant design. As it was Apollo who invented the system five years prior, I suppose the HMV design can be seen today as a slightly retrogressive side-step for its time.

AZ, I know you also have a 511 and a Model 32. How do you think your 211 compares to those two models in particular? I sold my 511's and Model 31 years ago so I can't compare them anymore!

Does anyone know if the horn inside the 201/211 is the same as the 192 or if it's slightly bigger?

The question over the French catalogues listing these models in the autumn of 1927 still lingers. I presume they don't appear in English catalogues for the same season?

[Dangermouse]

The large saxophone horn is a significant step above the standard internal horn enroute to the re-entrant design. As it was Apollo who invented the system five years prior, I suppose the HMV design can be seen today as a slightly retrogressive side-step for its time.

The Apollo " resonance chamber" was quite a step forward that HMV as you say used a few years later.

[Steve]

I think the key thing here is not how Apollo described their horn system ie. "Deep Tone Resonator", but more what it actually was, namely an exponential tapered and elongated sound conduit from soundbox to exit. The saxophone shape was ingenious, especially the way Apollo configured it which made better use of space than HMV's version. This was patented in 1920, long before the likes of EMG existed. Mr Ginn was probably still selling fish at the time.

There were quite a few pioneering gramophone makers from the mid Edwardian period through to the early 20s who sadly don't always get recognised today.

Mr Bassano was one. Alfred Graham was another.

[AZ*]

AZ, I know you also have a 511 and a Model 32. How do you think your 211 compares to those two models in particular? I sold my 511's and Model 31 years ago so I can't compare them anymore!

Does anyone know if the horn inside the 201/211 is the same as the 192 or if it's slightly bigger?

Here's my subjective judgment of the relative performance of my #4 soundbox-equipped cabinet machines ranked from top to bottom:

HMV 192
HMV 511
HMV 211
HMV 162
HMV 261

All 5 of these cabinet machines sound better (in my opinion) than the HMV 32. The HMV 32 handles most vocals fairly well, and it reveals musical content from acoustically recorded disks that I had never heard when these records were played on older, external horn Victors or pre-1925 Victrolas. I primarily listen to orchestral works electrically recorded in the late 1920s or early 1930s, and the HMV 32 unfortunately doesn't do as well with the lower frequencies. Not much bass.

Horn length - The length of the horn in my HMV 192 is significantly longer than the horn in my HMV 211. The horn in the 192 goes all the way to the bottom of the cabinet and back up (see photo), while the horn in the 211 stops about 10 inches above the bottom of the cabinet before turning upwards to leave room for the voltage step-down resistors. I hope that this design compromise was limited to the machines equipped with electric motors. If the horn in your 201 goes all the way to the bottom of the cabinet, I believe its size would be about the same or perhaps slightly longer than the horn in my 192. I really would like to know if the horn in the 201 is longer than the one in the 211.

HMV 192 horn