Columbia 201 vs 202

[Nat]

I've found a Columbia 201 at a very good price in Seattle, but I see it described as a "second tier" machine. Can anyone tell me the difference between the 201 and the 202? They look very similar, though the 201 in question does not have the record carrier in the lid. Is a 201 worth acquiring, or should I hold out for a 202?

Thanks,

Nat

[Phono48]

The 202 is the "big brother" of the 201. The 201 has a very short, curved pot metal internal horn which sounds surprisingly good, but is very prone to breaking where it meets the base of the arm. I would estimate that roughly 40% of the 201s I have had in the past have either been crudely repaired with hose clips, or are shattered beyond repair. The early versions of the 201 had nickel fittings and a No.9 soundbox, the later versions, chromium fittings and a No.15a.
The 202 has a much longer "double" internal horn, Part of which, together with the arm, rises as the lid is lifted. That part of the horn leaves the base of the arm, travels the full length of the case, and, at the point where it pivots, ends. But the sound is then reflected back up an outer horn to the back of the case, which then has two large chromium "reflecting wings" attached to the sides, to direct the sound upwards and out. Unfortunately the horn is again pot-metal, and the weak spots are at the base of the arm, as before, and at the pivot end of the horn. Having said that, the pot metal seems to survive much better on these than the 201s. Obviously the 202, with it's longer horn system sounds a lot better, and if you can find one without the pot metal problems, will easily compare with an HMV 102. The record albums are,in my opinion, essential, as the lids looks very empty without them, especially as the two brackets to hold them are very obvious. Beware of buying either model without the record album in the hope of getting one later, as they are of different sizes. Same height, but the 201 version is ten and a quarter inches wide, whilst the 202 is ten and three quarters.Both command high prices, as they are nearly always missing.Have a look in the "UK Machines" section at the thread entitled "Broken Columbia", and you'll know what to look for!

[Nat]

Thanks for the response & information. I think I may p[ass on the 201 in view of what you say, and keep looking for a 202; but the one I spotted was a $155...

Nat

[epigramophone]

After 1931 when Columbia and HMV merged to form EMI, these portables began to acquire HMV features including the 270 series motor with angled side winder and the "Pakawa" carrying handle.

If you can find one of these later versions you will have a very fine portable indeed.

[Nat]

If anyone is interested, here's the cl listing for the 201; a very responsive seller, Martin, who is willing to ship.

http://seattle.craigslist.org/see/atq/3921685092.html