why the overlooked Victrola #2 deserves a SECOND LOOK

[gramophone78]

Sean, now you have me curious...besides the fact that Victor makes no mention to "replacing the springs" due to temper is probably due to the fact these reproducer's were relatively new (when written) and a broken spring is an obvious repair. What other major changes did you come up with outside their (Victor's) scope??. Yes, there are going to be issues. However, most are created by the "new" replacement parts at are used. Depending on where they are bought will depend on the accuracy (including temper,etc..)of the non-Victor replacement part. I have always used NOS Victor replacement parts and rarely have I had to work outside the scope.This comment only applies to Exhibition's, Victrola #2's...etc...I do not rebuild Orthophonic's.
Last, the "deformed needle bar issue" is another perfect example. Many, many needle bars have not stood well with time. It is a weak point that can go unnoticed to an untrained eye. As the member himself stated....."although it seems to perform well, the needle is angled slightly".
If the needle bar is out in anyway.....forget about the balancing act. Your wasting your time. If this should be the case with an Exhibition....this issue will create problems with the mica in other ways too like,touching the main body (impeding sound) being not truly centered along with the other issues discussed.

My comment to Mike regarding "how many" was asked because he seems "very" involved with reproducer dynamics and ways to improve them. However, the mirror advice (now removed) just seemed to be confusing or even unnecessary.

[OrthoSean]

I'm not sure what would cause curiousity here, I've written about things you can do to improve results on a #2 and Exhibitions here in other posts, but simply put, the two biggest things are what gaskets / isolators one uses and how the final balance adjustments are made. I wasn't even considering a bent needle bar, that's not relevant to my point.

As an example, I bought a "rebuilt" gold #2 on eBay some years ago to have as a spare. By "rebuilt", the guy replaced the gaskets with lousy non-flexible red-ish gaskets that were hardly compliant, he tightened all of the needle bar screws ALL THE WAY down and didn't bother replacing the mica which had a split where the needle bar joins the mica, the cracked original isolator was still there and no wax sealing the bar to the mica. It played with no rattle but also no volume, and this was someone who at the time was selling a lot of these this way! Of course, I tore it down and did it my way.

My big "secret" is all in the final tuning. And yes, I said tuning. When everything is back together and adjusted as it should be, without tightening down the lock nuts completely, I play several loud acoustics that I keep around for this purpose. You can "tweak" them until you get not only optimum sound, but ultimately zero black dust on a clean 78 if you do it right and are patient. My rebuilds take sometimes hours, not minutes, because I spend so much time doing final adjustments. Once those adjustments are done to my satisfaction, I then tighten the lock nuts and we're good to go. People may not believe that it makes any kind of difference, but to that, all I can say is perhaps another of several members here that I've done them for can vouch for my OCD when it comes to this. The improvement in sound from a regular "rebuild" is more than just a little noticeable. Victor obviously wouldn't have bothered to include this is any service notes because, again, it wasn't something anyone paid much attention to then, you followed their notes, the rattles went away and the customer was happy. I just prefer to take things a little further so my 78s don't suffer any more than they should.

Sean

[gramophone78]

You can't help but love the "tighten down until it can't no more technique... . I too agree about the "fine tuning". Like you, that's just my OCD showing.... .

[Kryptosmaster]

I watched that video on YT just out of curiosity and while it appears to be somewhat helpful, the guy does things I'd never do, such as use GLUE! And interesting at the end how he "plays" it. Doubtful what we hear is that reproducer at all.

Sean

I thought the glue was overkill but figured it was needed for some reason. I did use some but just enough to hold the front gasket in place. Don't think it really needed it and would skip that on the next one.

[Lenoirstreetguy]

Sean is absolutely right about the necessity for tuning the soundbox once the rebuilding is finished. The Victor factory instructions don't go into this at length because in 1920 ( or whenever) they knew exactly the characteristics... the density...the compliance and the dimensions of the rubber parts they were using. So if you followed the directions the result would be within quite acceptable limits. We don't have stock gasket material and isolators from Camden or Montreal.

JRT

[Player-Tone]

Mike, I understand you are a newer collector and I do wonder how many Victor reproducers you've rebuilt. That said, the best way to rebuild a Victor reproducer is by following the instructions that Victor themselves have written. Most of the long time collectors I know(myself included) do...

I have enough experience to know what I am doing. In addition to my own phonograph rebuilds I have a small phonograph repair business in which I help out some local antique stores and friends with their phonograph acquisitions. Thus far I did a couple late VV-XIs and an old Regina music box motor rebuild with additional jobs lined up. My costumers have been very happy with the quality and performance of my rebuilds.

I also take great care and time when fine tuning a reproducer to ensure optimized audio and wear performance. My OCD on that topic even drove me to make the custom flange gasket found at the linked thread below in the ‘Tips, Tricks & Tutorials’ section. This gasket corrected the pre-Orthophonic tracking issue of the early tone-arms without damaging the phonograph’s integrity.
http://forum.talkingmachine.info/viewto ... =7&t=13306



-I will admit that my ‘mirror’ advice wasn’t helpful though. As I said, the idea sounded good in my head but I hadn’t actually tried it before posting my comment.

[howardpgh]

My question:
Would using NOS gaskets defeat the purpose of a rebuild? They would be around the same age as the gaskets you are replacing and be just as noncompliant.
BTW: Sean rebuilt my #2 and it really sounds good.

[OrthoSean]

My question:
Would using NOS gaskets defeat the purpose of a rebuild? They would be around the same age as the gaskets you are replacing and be just as noncompliant.

Short answer: yes, completely!

Before Ron Sitko was making the gaskets he offers now, all you could get were these thick dense ones that really "pinched" the sound from an otherwise rebuilt and adjusted #2. I never liked the way they sounded.

Glad you liked my rebuild!

Sean

[gramophone78]

My question:
Would using NOS gaskets defeat the purpose of a rebuild? They would be around the same age as the gaskets you are replacing and be just as noncompliant.
BTW: Sean rebuilt my #2 and it really sounds good.

Sean does superior work. Regarding Victor NOS parts.....I was referring to needle bars, springs, mica's, for obvious reasons you can not use old gasket material. Some makers of gasket material are better than others. Personally,I have found the latest to be poor for Exhibition's.

Mike, I wish you much success to your Phonograph/music box repair business.

[Kryptosmaster]

I also take great care and time when fine tuning a reproducer to ensure optimized audio and wear performance. My OCD on that topic even drove me to make the custom flange gasket found at the linked thread below in the ‘Tips, Tricks & Tutorials’ section. This gasket corrected the pre-Orthophonic tracking issue of the early tone-arms without damaging the phonograph’s integrity.
http://forum.talkingmachine.info/viewto ... =7&t=13306
.

Ive read that thread a couple times. Did you ever come up with a product to offer?