What Makes an EMG an EMG?

[emgcr]

Very interesting thread, and I was thinking the other day of asking a similar question, more from the point of why there don't seem to be any clones or imitations of EMG/Expert soundboxes. Now it may be just that I am unaware of them, being quite new to this hobby, but I have seen Exhibition clones and soundboxes which show more than a passing resemblance to a No.4. The EMG/Expert ones seem to be of fairly simple construction and I would have thought imitations would exist. I am not saying the imitations would be any good, just that they would have been made.
Can anyone enlighten me?
Thanks
mrrgstuff

As Steve says, there have been a few copies and/or "own design" examples made over the years but the quick answer is that there have always been (just) enough original soundboxes to go around in our minority interest world. In addition, Meltrope III boxes are also used which are in plentiful supply (Models I and II less so). Their performance can sometimes be as good as EMG/Expert/Astra but the negative is that they are more or less unadjustable so you have to find a good one. There often seems to be no obvious rhyme or reason as to why one gives a good sound and another does not---hence black art ! The problem may partly have to do with the "mass-produced" (by comparison) way in which the stylus was crimped to the diaphragm in a non-removable way---not always remaining 100% mechanically stable or airtight over the years. EMG/Expert/Astra used easily demountable and much more satisfactory machine screws.

It is also not as easy to re-manufacture effectively as you might think. The cases are reasonably simple but once you start to get seriously involved with the minutiae of stylus bars, springs and diaphragms etc the plot thickens considerably. What kind of steel or aluminium is best for these items ? What heat treatment ? What alloy ? What thickness ? What diameter annular rings ? How many ? etc etc..............To complete such a project really satisfactorily would take many years and include much research and experimentation since all of the original information and empirical evidence has sadly gone to the grave with the makers. If, however, this were all to be done, the cost would be considerable and probably well in excess of what these items currently sell for on eBay---but even then, still a labour of love. If the potential market were much larger, the equation would be different and viability a possibility.

[Orchorsol]

Perfect answer Graham. The variability of adjustments and their effect on performance, let alone minutiae of development of the designs, is huge! Admiration and kudos to people who have produced their own high quality soundboxes along similar lines, as we've seen in other threads, but I can't see 100% serious initiatives ever being viable for the reasons you've set out.

[alang]

Very interesting thread, and I was thinking the other day of asking a similar question, more from the point of why there don't seem to be any clones or imitations of EMG/Expert soundboxes. Now it may be just that I am unaware of them, being quite new to this hobby, but I have seen Exhibition clones and soundboxes which show more than a passing resemblance to a No.4. The EMG/Expert ones seem to be of fairly simple construction and I would have thought imitations would exist. I am not saying the imitations would be any good, just that they would have been made.
Can anyone enlighten me?
Thanks
mrrgstuff

By the time of EMG/Expert, acoustic gramophones were long out of mainstream, so the incentive of cloning their reproducers was probably not worth it. Exhibition or No.4 clones were made during the boom years when large quantities could be sold. The thirties was the time of cheaply cast pot-metal orthophonic clones. Any audiophile during that time who would go through the effort and investment of buying an EMG or Expert machine would have bought the real hand-made thing, not a cheap knock-off.
Today of course is quite different. With the prices charged for original EMG/Expert sound boxes, I could see people going through the effort of making a modern fake, but even that would have to be on a small scale. Once too many flood the market, prices would drop, at least for the fakes. Also, the market for these machines is relatively small, a niche within the already small gramophone collectors market. Yes, some skilled craftsman could potentially make convincing clones, but I don't think it would be on a large scale.

Andreas

[mrrgstuff]

By the time of EMG/Expert, acoustic gramophones were long out of mainstream, so the incentive of cloning their reproducers was probably not worth it. Exhibition or No.4 clones were made during the boom years when large quantities could be sold. The thirties was the time of cheaply cast pot-metal orthophonic clones. Any audiophile during that time who would go through the effort and investment of buying an EMG or Expert machine would have bought the real hand-made thing, not a cheap knock-off.

I wasn't sure anyone would have an opinion on this, so thank you everyone for the details and thoughts you have provided. Very enlightening.

I certainly agree it would be no small task to build a clone which performed as well as the real thing , but I do like the explanation quoted above which does to me make real sense as to why there were not cheap knock offs at the time.

The availability of the Meltrope III, and the fairly close matching of supply and demand of the real thing also makes much sense.

I suppose, just like 'old masters', there are probably some 'one off' copies made by amateurs over the years which may be circulating (entirely innocently) as the genuine article. I am certainly not suggesting anybody tries to fake these in quantity, though there is no doubt that with modern CAD and CNC equipment, the basic metal work would not be a problem.

Thanks again
mrrgstuff

[barnettrp21122]

JerryVan:
I've sent you a PM.
Bob B.