Very early 'travelling arm' gramophones - Question

[CarlosV]

I guess you are referring to the side load on the record groove due to the mass of the horn and traveling arm.

Not really, what I mean are dynamics: the combination of drag (forces imposed by the air resistance when the contraption arm-horn moves) and the dynamic load imposed by the mass distribution of the vibrating object. The soundbox, arm and horn vibrate, especially in their resonant frequencies, and that makes their mass properties relevant to determine loads. Having the horn directly attached to the soundbox with no damping certainly creates extraneous loads. From that standpoint the Berliner dog model is more benign, due to the leather elbow that provides some damping between horn and soundbox.

[JerryVan]

I guess you are referring to the side load on the record groove due to the mass of the horn and traveling arm.

Not really, what I mean are dynamics: the combination of drag (forces imposed by the air resistance when the contraption arm-horn moves) and the dynamic load imposed by the mass distribution of the vibrating object. The soundbox, arm and horn vibrate, especially in their resonant frequencies, and that makes their mass properties relevant to determine loads. Having the horn directly attached to the soundbox with no damping certainly creates extraneous loads. From that standpoint the Berliner dog model is more benign, due to the leather elbow that provides some damping between horn and soundbox.

Is it possible that we're overthinking these 120 year-old devices just a little bit?

[Hoodoo]

[quote=JerryVan post_id=338513 time=1704399489 user_id=782

Is it possible that we're overthinking these 120 year-old devices just a little bit?
[/quote]

Hah! Too true!

[CarlosV]

Is it possible that we're overthinking these 120 year-old devices just a little bit?

Sure, all these machines look paleolithic in comparison with modern ones. However, as you read the posts in this forum, a good chunk of them is about efforts to modify these artifacts to bring them to higher standards of performance, some of which are based on misleading assumptions, like the misconception that it is always a good thing to reduce the pressure of the needle on the groove.

[JerryVan]

Is it possible that we're overthinking these 120 year-old devices just a little bit?

Sure, all these machines look paleolithic in comparison with modern ones. However, as you read the posts in this forum, a good chunk of them is about efforts to modify these artifacts to bring them to higher standards of performance, some of which are based on misleading assumptions, like the misconception that it is always a good thing to reduce the pressure of the needle on the groove.

Carlos,

No arguments. Just my light hearted take on it. Personally, I appreciate these machines with all their technical faults intact. I enjoy the experience of hearing the same sounds that the original owners would have heard. That's just me though. I can understand how it would also be fun to tweak things for better performance.

[Curt A]

I agree with Jerry. They are what they are, and the experience of hearing what amazed listeners of the time is what is interesting. The records are crude by modern standards, also. These are the closest things to a real time machine that exist.