Is my reproducer too heavy?

[martinola]

Yep, the reproducers of the period were quite heavy. The decorative cover on the reproducer looks like it would be adding some of that weight. Using records of the proper period will help. If you stick to records up to the very early 1930s, I think you'll have better results. After the introduction of the lighter weight tone arms on electric machines, the record manufacturers switched to shellac without abrasive in it. The abrasive was used to shape the needle to the groove. Records lasted longer. But with lighter tone arms it wasn't necessary and the abrasive made for extra hiss. When using the softer later records with the heavier tonearm, the records wear faster and there is more drag. Anyway, good luck with the restoration!

- Martin

[Orthophonic]

Try an older Victor record that is not worn badly. Newer records, especially thos that are unbreakable are really bad to drag down a phonograph. I have also have had trouble with older columbia records from time to time.

[Phono48]

It is not enough to remove the springs and put them back without thoroughly cleaning them and then lubricating with clean fresh grease. It's probably this old sticky grease that is hampering the springs power.With respect to the above posts, whilst it is certainly true that discs from the fifties do cause problems when the spring is weak, a motor with properly overhauled, or new springs should be able to cope with records from any period. It would certainly help if the soundbox can be adjusted to a better angle, though. When passed over the centre spindle, the needle point should ideally pass directly over, or slightly in front of, the spindle. Soft tone needles, being thinner and more flexible, cause less drag, and are a lot kinder to your records.

Barry

[FloridaClay]

Just on the remote chance that it might be something else, the record you are trying to play is a shellac 78 isn't it? Toward the 40s and 50s some record companies came out with vinyl 78s designed to be played on later machines with electric reproducers that were MUCH lighter. Vinyl 78s will bring most acoustic machines to a stop as the needle digs into the surface from the weight of the reproducer not meant to play that kind of record.

Clay

[Uncle Vanya]

The one in your picture doesn't look like any vintage reproducer I've seen.

Then you haven't seen all that many reproducers, have you?

This is an extremely common unit from the late 1920's (orthophonic era). I know of at least eight variations, including Tru-phonic, Mello-Phonic, Jewel-Tone (with a glass "diamond" glued into the face) among others. As noted elsewhere, the units were sold by Tomon Mfg.

These are not really the best sounding reproducers, but when rebuilt they perform better than most mica diaphragm units.