EMG Mk X Query

[emgcr]

Thank you for these details Iain all of which add to the ever unfolding story and history of EMG which continues day by day. Is it certain that the darker ring is not a well-made wooden infill ? I take your point about the accuracy of the craftsmanship which is commendable. I suppose since you bought at auction you have no further details of the provenance ?

Three final observations :

1. There is no lock---unlike other Mk Xs (or Xas and Xbs) I have seen.

2. The two holes top right on the front deck-board could have been for the lid stay in a different position ? Check for witness on the lid.

3. The lid handle is not usually seen on an EMG but some have this (sensible !) feature added at a later date.

Regarding the offset example I once owned, I have made enquiries but further details as to the original tonearm type are lost in the mists of time I am afraid. It is probably a good thing not to be completely certain about everything---let the mystery remain !

[IainW]

Attached is photo showing where conduit comes up through the deck - with the use of a blanking plate is it usually this tight. Also picture of tone arm bearing - if the case was built round the existing components I do wonder why the cabinet maker would cut out a notch in the support ring rather than just locate the deck board screw adjacent to it.
Could it have been built with the deck and turntable already set in position which would then dictate where the tone arm pivot had to be to ensure correct tracking. There is plenty of clear wood at the front of the deck so the whole deck could have been brought forward.
The top deck is solid. The dark ring below the conduit flange is simply where the case is unbleached by sunlight.
No trace of witness marks for support stay on the right hand side of lid.
I suspect we will not get much further with the history of this example. My initial query as to what motor was originally fitted has only opened up many more which are probably unanswerable. All part of the rich tapestry.

[emgcr]

Attached is photo showing where conduit comes up through the deck - with the use of a blanking plate is it usually this tight ?

No, there is usually a good air gap between the woodwork and the conduit. My impression is that this was done on purpose to minimise unwanted frequencies (motor etc) entering the auditory trunking. The more usual nickel-plated cover ring also did not touch the conduit for the same reasons but was added mainly for cosmetic purposes. Whoever made your example seems to have decided to augment the structural stability of the horn by making the conduit a good fit in the rear deck-board instead of merely relying on the woodwork at the top of the case. EMG decided on the latter course of action by incorporating the stabilisation ring under the woodwork at the top of the case. In that instance, when assembling, I have found it important to wind the lower ring upwards just sufficient to ensure a really good pressure fit when winding down the top ring---aided by the peg-drive spanner. A strong sandwich situation is thus ensured. Stability is then good, even when employing an Oversize horn which is slightly nose-heavy.

Also picture of tone arm bearing - if the case was built round the existing components I do wonder why the cabinet maker would cut out a notch in the support ring rather than just locate the deck board screw adjacent to it.
Could it have been built with the deck and turntable already set in position which would then dictate where the tone arm pivot had to be to ensure correct tracking. There is plenty of clear wood at the front of the deck so the whole deck could have been brought forward.

Normally, the screw (and the other behind---plus the two equivalents on the left hand side) you refer to which is interfering with the tonearm bearing flange is not required at all as the rear deck-board slides into position in the carefully rebated sidewalls in the case---a good fit. Hard to tell from your photos but I think I am right in saying that your deck-board is just resting on two under-battens and not rebated into the case ? If this is so, it is further evidence that EMG was not involved in my opinion. Either that or EMG themselves had not developed their thinking that far at that stage if yours is a near prototype ?

I quite agree with your thoughts about bringing the tonearm and motor forward although the rear deck-board would have to be replaced with a wider version. Also, the front deck-board would have to be cut back, of course. The offending screw could then have been replaced by a countersunk equivalent allowing the tonearm bearing flange to oversail. There is a fair amount of geometry to think about when designing and building an EMG case.

[IainW]

The use of a cover ring certainly would make the fitting of the conduit easier. With such a tight fit the only way I can see the conduit can be extracted is by dropping it down to clear the top deck, slide out the deck board then thread the conduit bend through the hole to remove by the tone arm end. (which is presumably small enough to fit through the hole.)
It seems strange that the blanking plate was not used, as all the other bits (tone arm rest, lid stay) were.
It is not clear in the photo of prototype example in Modern Gramophones if it has a blanking plate or not. If early examples did not use one that may explain it not being transferred across if the case is of a later date.
The deck boards just sit on the side battens, there is no rebate in the sides

[soundgen]

I think you need a Ouija board to contact Mr Ginn

[Lucius1958]

I think you need a Ouija board to contact Mr Ginn

Or try to get through to EMG via EVP...

- Bill

[BassetHoundTrio]

Congratulations! I do recall that machine at auction, with another EMG, if I remember correctly. All very fascinating. I am curious about the tonearm tracking, as to my eye it appears the turntable platter is set further back in the cabinet than ideal. Graham can discuss the particulars regarding the tonearm geometry and tracking, but I go with a .5" overlap from the needle to the spindle. What is the approximate overlap?