Best/Worst Type of Horn for Cylinder Phonographs?

[syncopeter]

Both videos sound remarkably good, showing how good purely acoustic reproducing can be. EMG and Expert constantly experimented with their reproducers, using all kinds of materials and different sizes. IMO the reproducer makes 80% of the sound, the horn is important, no two ways about that, but even a small table model with a perfect soundbox easily outperforms a grand cabinet with a bad one.
That Ediphonic is amazing, I've never heard a cylinder sounding so good.

[gregbogantz]

Norman, there is no loss of volume with the new lateral reproducer over the standard Victor #5 orthophonic. And the Ediphonic cylinder horn is every bit as efficient as any other horn while being much better sounding.

Many people have experimented with trying to improve the performance of acoustic reproducers, but few understand the physics of these things. The result is typically a mishmash of diddles and twiddles that don't result in any significant improvements because most tinkerers simply don't know what they're doing. Tom has really just stood back and taken a clean engineering look at what an acoustic reproducer needs to do and then designed one that does those things better than all the earlier designs. It's pretty simply, really, it's not magic. There are several physical requirements, some of which are conflicting with each other. Improve in one aspect and you are likely to degrade one or two other aspects. It's an engineering balancing act and you need to understand the physics of the acoustic reproducer to make a proper engineering compromise of the several conflicting requirements. Once you understand the functions of stylus bar, stylus bar bearing, needle chuck, diaphragm and all the other associated parts that have to respond to the vibrations from the needle tip, and you make those parts with the lowest mass and the highest stiffness to mass ratio, you've gotten most of the job done. When you've done it right, you get better bass, better treble, and higher compliance which reduces distortion all at the same time, compared with any earlier design. The shape of the compression chamber is distinctly secondary in importance, but that needs to be addressed as well. Tom's design includes parts that bear almost no resemblance to any of the original designs from any manufacturer.

Another interesting thing about Tom's lateral reproducer (I'll call it the KimblePhonic) is that it is designed to use NO modern materials! That's right - it COULD have been made 80 years ago with materials available then and it would have sounded then as good as it does now. It was a curious little engineering challenge that Tom set for himself - to see if acoustic reproducers COULD have been much better in the past. The answer is yes, as you can plainly hear in the demonstration. Likewise, had Edison or Columbia or any other maker of cylinder machines produced an exponential horn, they would have gotten MUCH better sound than with anything they actually put on the market.

Some collectors consider these projects as heresy - I can hear the mumblings of "frankenphone" coming from certain collectors. But to the engineering mind it is a challenge to see if the old designs can rather easily be improved upon. After all the experimentation is written off, it is clear that, yes, acoustic record reproduction COULD have sounded better than it did and that improvement could have been obtained at very little difference in manufacturing cost over the designs that were originally sold. And these improvements can be enjoyed today if one is not a hard-core traditionalist.

[barnettrp21122]

Thanks, Greg, for your extended explanations. Do you know if there's a chance for others to get the Ediphonic diamond B diaphragm or rebuilds for the A, B or C reproducers?
Bob

[gregbogantz]

Hi Bob, Yes, I recommend Steve Medved as an expert rebuilder of all the Edison reproducers. I believe that he is a member of the TMF and I know that he is on both the Phonolist and Phono-L listservs. Steve uses my diaphragms which I make and provide to him, as well as other makes if you so choose. And I can sell you my diaphragms directly which I furnish together with a complete set of rebuilding instructions. The job is not difficult so long as all the other parts of the reproducer are in good condition.

You may be wondering how my diaphragm for the Diamond B reproducer compares with what you heard on Tom's Ediphonic. Tom is not making his diaphragm or his KimblePhonic reproducer available for sale, so far as I know. I have one of Tom's diaphragm designs for the Diamond B and have compared it with mine. Tom's design is different looking, but the results are about the same as with mine. Both are distinct sonic improvements over the Edison original. You can hear my diaphragms in operation in a number of the YouTube videos posted by Valecnik. I have designs available for the Diamond Disc, the Diamond ABC models, and the M and O reproducers. PM me if you are interested.

[barnettrp21122]

Thanks Greg. Pm sent!
B.

[alang]

Hi Bob, Yes, I recommend Steve Medved as an expert rebuilder of all the Edison reproducers. I believe that he is a member of the TMF and I know that he is on both the Phonolist and Phono-L listservs. Steve uses my diaphragms which I make and provide to him, as well as other makes if you so choose. And I can sell you my diaphragms directly which I furnish together with a complete set of rebuilding instructions. The job is not difficult so long as all the other parts of the reproducer are in good condition.

I agree, Steve Medved does a great job rebuilding Edison reproducers, he just completed 3 of mine and I am very happy with the results. He used Greg's diaphragm on my Diamond Disc reproducer and it sounds great.
Andreas