Cylinder Records VS. Disc Records

[Marc Hildebrant]

As a teenager in the 1960's when real Rock and Roll and Soul music was popular, I found the 4 minute Edison Cylinders equally enjoyable to listen to as the music on the radio.

Music is universal and timeless, at least to me.

Marc

[drh]

Another possible explanation is that cylinders are more of a niche market than discs. That is certainly the case in the UK, where all my collector friends own disc machines but many do not own, or want to own, cylinder machines.

Well, I think you nailed it: here in the United States, cylinder machines are fairly common and the least expensive route for those who want an open horn, but relative to internal horn disk machines they are expensive and take a format that's been dead since 1929 and was on life support for a good 15 years or more before that. Disk machines are everywhere, can be had inexpensively as long as you don't insist on a high-end or open-horn model, and play something common, familiar, and easy to store, at least relatively speaking. Hence, the universe of buyers for disks is much bigger.

As to ease of selling, what's on the record is key. Yeah, I know--"if it isn't hot jazz, it doesn't count." Not necessarily true. In my own area of focus, classical and opera, cylinders are in demand and can draw big money, although, as with disks, not for those who overprice the more common ones--the first few Edison Grand Opera cylinders, rather like Caruso Red Seals but to a lesser extent, turn up relatively often. On the other hand, I saw a Caruso cylinder go for just into the four figures a few years back. (The seller's other one, which was seriously damaged, didn't sell, because he got greedy and tried to milk it for the same level of money.) Indeed, I have quipped in the past, "Operatic cylinders would be a rich man's game, except that if he gets into them, the man won't be rich for long."

Here's an example, fresh off the press. Yesterday in an online auction I bid on a French Columbia cylinder of an "opera type" selection. I didn't go at it aggressively, because the cylinder, while definitely uncommon, had mold issues, and let's just say I was skeptical about the seller's "some mold but plays loud and clear." My bid did not hold, and the record ended up going for $52 and change. Now, I would submit that north of $50 for a moldy cylinder shows more than "not much interest" in the cylinder format, as long as the music is right. As for popular music, well, sentimental songs and traditional hymns can be found on cylinder and disk alike, and good luck selling them in either format!

[Menophanes]

Three more drawbacks to cylinders and their players: –

1. Noisy motors, largely because of the high speed of rotation and (in most machines) the need for extra gearing to drive the feed-screw. (Possibly this aspect was improved in the Amberola period; I have had no experience of these later machines, which are in short supply east of the Atlantic.)

2. Lack of a flywheel (corresponding to the turntable of a gramophone). In the absence of this, small irregularities in the finish and balance of the moving parts result in variations of pitch that are painful to many ears, especially in slower music. Only in Edison's Opera and a few Amberola models of 1909–14 (the I, II and V, I think) was a half-hearted attempt made to correct this deficiency.

3. Unimaginative internal-horn design. Edison never responded to the innovations made by gramophone manufacturers in their sound-conduits from 1925 onwards; his designs had practically become static ten years earlier, the horn being a simple flattened cone. There was never a cylinder machine acoustically equivalent to a good table gramophone of the late 1920s, not to mention an E.M.G. or an H.M.V. 31 or 163.

Oliver Mundy.

[Inigo]

It's curious to see the imagined progress of phonographs had Edison continued production and observed latest improvements in acoustic horns... The Ediphonic, a phonograph with exponential horn! Watch this link:
https://youtu.be/jhLjcfswHb0

[CarlosV]

I also have to agree with the point that cylinders mostly feature boring music which is completely out of fashion today. While a jazzy or swing disc record would still appeal almost everybody, as both genres happened to become evergreens over the decades, the popular songs often featured on cylinders tell absolutely nothing to contemporary people.

The main reason for the above is that by 1910 the only producer of new content in cylinders was Edison, all other companies having switched to flat discs. Having said that, there is interesting content in the Edison production especially when the 4-minute records were put on the market. However, after an initial production, the recording directly to cylinders ceased, and Amberols started to be dubbed from diamond discs, and most of these dubbed cylinders have distortions and don't sound as good as the flat Edison records with the same music. But in terms of content, there are ragtimes, some jazz groups like Phil Napoleon and the Memphis Five, dance bands, some interesting pop singers etc. If you like classical music, there are plenty of early opera singers in cylinders, though limited by the 2-minute cutout time.

[drh]

...3. Unimaginative internal-horn design. Edison never responded to the innovations made by gramophone manufacturers in their sound-conduits from 1925 onwards; his designs had practically become static ten years earlier, the horn being a simple flattened cone. There was never a cylinder machine acoustically equivalent to a good table gramophone of the late 1920s, not to mention an E.M.G. or an H.M.V. 31 or 163.

Oliver Mundy.

I'm not sure this is quite a fair complaint. If you compare Edison's cygnet horn machines to the pre-Orthophonic Victrolas or, I'll dare to say, even most of Victor's open horn machines, Edison's horns are actually better, and as I understand things they aren't at a terrible disadvantage relative to even the small Orthophonics. As to the Amberolas, I'd say the horn designs are no worse than those of the typical pre-Orthophonic cabinet disk players and probably better than at least some. Yes, the folded re-entrant exponential horns were an advance, but by then even Edison's discs, much less the cylinders, quickly became a spent force in the marketplace; a company that was foundering could hardly be expected to put many resources into upgrading the machines to play what had become very much an afterthought format.

Or, put it another way: would, say, a Victrola XI fare any better against a good table gramophone of the late 1920s, an EMG, or an HMV 31 or 163? The XI is from the period when cylinders were still at least somewhat viable in the marketplace, and that's what the machines to play them were designed to oppose; by the time those later machines rolled 'round, cylinders for the most part were dead.

[Marco Gilardetti]

But in terms of content, there are ragtimes, some jazz groups like Phil Napoleon and the Memphis Five, dance bands, some interesting pop singers etc. If you like classical music, there are plenty of early opera singers in cylinders, though limited by the 2-minute cutout time.

Thanks for your comment, Carlos! I am aware that the occasional jazz or ragtime cylinder exist. In my (extremely limited) experience these are very hard to get, and in most cases demand great money, which in my very humble opinion is another reason why people steer away from cylinders. Of course also great jazz names on disc records demand money, but again in my very limited experience there are by comparison many more second-rank jazzy or swing or ragtime discs at very reasonable prices.

Coming to operatic records, once again I will first admit that my experience is extremely limited, but I have been not to the slightest degree impressed by the sound quality that I've heard out of them, and actually I experienced all of the issues that other fellows already mentioned (poor preservation of the cylinder compound, fluttery sound due to lack of flywheel effect, and so on). I think it's worth mentioning that all of this simply doesn't exist if one just gets a disc machine as simple as an HMV 102, one of the best and at the same cheapest and trouble-less machines ever made, readily available all over the world at a very reasonable cost.

As a side note, I have also checked the contemporary re-pressings of Columbia-style "Grand" cylinders, and much to my disappointment 90% of the titles available were US military marches by Sousa etc. that - for how amusing they might be - tell nearly nothing to a European customer, who for shure is not willing to part from 100$ each and go through the fuss of an overseas mailing, duties inspection, etc. etc. etc.

[Edisonfan]

I managed to sell some disc records at my parents antique booth at Old Glory in Frederick Maryland. Disc records are easier too sell.

[VanEpsFan1914]

The 4-minute Blue Amberol cylinder compares to the Victor Victrolas of the same era but the Victrola took the market back then for the same reason that discs sell better today--Also, you about need an antique machine to play cylinders; you can use a modern turntable to play discs without having to set up an old phonograph.

The disc record stores better, sounds good, and lasts a long time too--I like the music on cylinders but it's also on discs.

Due to budget concerns right now I pretty much use only discs.

[Marc Hildebrant]

With regard to all of the stated mechanical problems with the Edison machine design...

My Podcasts for 2 Minute Cylinders used songs created using a modified 2 Minute Edison Reproducer (crystal element instead of the diaphragm) mounted in a Triumph Edison machine. The machine was not modified.

Listen to the Podcasts and note if you hear any machine noise or speed change (# 1 and #2 are popular).

Marc