EXPERT two-spring v four-spring soundboxes

[Steve]

Having spent a few hours today trying out several Expert sound-boxes on my Senior, it confirmed my long held suspicions that to my ears at least the two-spring sound-boxes are markedly superior to the four-spring types. I have four number four-springs and a couple of two-spring types. All sound-boxes have either been rebuilt by me with new rubber backs, new gaskets and washers/sealing 'bungs' OR are in excellent original condition with 'tuning' last done by someone more qualified than myself. The point is that no two sound-boxes should sound exactly the same as they have all been assembled / tuned at different times. However, regardless of the type of music played, and without exception, the two-spring boxes both outperformed all the four-spring types. The two-spring boxes are much lighter in weight, easier on records/needles and capable of being used with both steel and fibre needles. The four-spring boxes are all too heavy for steel needles. However, for the purposes of the experiment only fibre needles were used.

We found that high frequencies were much clearer and cleaner with the two-spring types, with bass also being much tighter. The volume was also better and mid-range perhaps a little more forward. Swapping these over onto an HMV re-entrant, we also discovered that only the two-spring types outperformed the magnificent HMV 5A, which otherwise beat out the four-springs on range and clarity. I'm slightly curious about all this as it has long been believed by most of the original customers, modern collectors (and "EXPERT" in its day )that the four-spring types were the superior boxes. Has anyone else noticed this contradiction or are our ears playing tricks with us? A professional musician was amongst those who listened today, so the findings and general agreement about which one sounded better was quite astonishing to say the least.

[Garret]

Steve,

Thanks for posting this review! I fear you might have stirred up the hornets nest with this one, but am curious to see how the discussion proceed! Even just looking at a four-spring soundbox, I've had difficulty in understanding how it could sound better or be more compliant than the two-spring.

Garret

[chunnybh]

Generally I concur with your findings. Most of my 2-spring soundboxes both Expert and EMG sound good playing any record, BUT then I have four, 4-spring soundboxes that obviously out perform any other soundbox. All four are slightly different and there is one Expert 4-spring that really is astounding.
No matter how I tune any other box they never sound as good, close but not. I am petrified to use it, in case I accidently shift or alter something. I use it to gauge what a 4-spring really should sound like. I've spent ages studying it; I cannot fathom what it is that makes this box so special.
After a rebuild the 2-spring boxes with minimal tuning, generally sound good. The 4-springs can take ages to get just right and then change after several plays. Almost like breaking-in new strings on a guitar; takes a while to settle-in. But then I have several 4-springs that no matter how many times I rebuild them, they just sound awful. Using a counter balance makes a marked difference so perhaps it's a weight, balance thing.

[Orchorsol]

From experience of my and others' soundboxes I have to concur in general - that 2-spring EMG soundboxes generally sound much better than 4-spring. However, like you Chunny, I have one incredible 4-spring Expert that bucks the trend - it absolutely sings, and has extraordinary bass. Otherwise I use a couple of 2-spring Experts for most everyday purposes and they're both fantastic.

This does indeed seem puzzling considering that 'back in the day', the 4-spring soundboxes of both makes were the superior products. Some of us were chatting and trying to conjecture about this only the other week when we got together. My one pet theory, probably rather unsatisfactory, and against which I have yet to make an extensive listening study, is that it might relate to types of records EMGs and Experts were typically sold for. Perhaps the extra control of the auxiliary springs particularly suits or is advantageous for the dense, complex frequency landscape of heavy orchestral records - as against the simpler/purer sound of chamber or vocal music? Might there be anything in the literature that indicates 2-spring boxes being adequate for the latter? On the other hand, being commercial entities, the companies would have wanted to sell the premium items wherever possible, presumably...

[emgcr]

I would also agree in general but there are so many variables that I think it is difficult to make sweeping statements. I also have some wonderful 4 spring boxes but have to admit that I usually use a 2 spring as an every day item. The latter is very stable and gives a superb tone/depth etc to all recordings at all frequencies. I play almost exclusively with Burmese thorn needles which are kept very dry in a house which contains an Aga---failures are rare. I resort to medium steel only for very heavily modulated jazz or very worn records. Again, the 2 spring does well.

In my opinion, and in view of the fact that almost all of the original knowledge seems to have been lost, a study needs to be made of the weights and materials of various soundboxes and, in particular, the salient features of diaphragms as far as annular ring design, thickness, and alloy are concerned. It is also necessary to chronicle heat treatment and method of manufacture---ie spinning or pressing. Diaphragm diameter is, of course, also very important, thus any meaningful study would necessarily be a somewhat complex and time-consuming affair.

[Steve]

Thanks for the feedback, Chunny. That's an interesting observation about counter-weights. But what I don't understand is how the weight of the sound-box could have been an important enough issue for Expert to make significantly heavier sound-boxes and yet then expect customers to buy counter-weights simply in order to reduce the additional weight / force at the needle point! Isn't this all a great contradiction? Heavier sound-boxes were either definitely better or they were not. Making them heavier only to then reduce the weight with another device does seem a little bit of a folly.

Garret, you are quite correct. In no way can a four-spring soundbox ever be anywhere near as compliant as a two-spring with those two additional cross-springs in place. If they are loose, they rattle. If they are tightened, they prevent much of the dynamic movement of the stylus bar - completely self-defeating, in other words. What the four-spring s/boxes do actually achieve then is a degree of "control" and dampening. This doesn't improve sound quality in my opinion but harnesses the energy of the diaphragm and effectively mutes it by absorbing the motion into the springs and into the fixed body of the s/box via damping materials ie leather, rubber, cork etc. But, to what purpose? Is it to make things quieter and less bombastic? Even the better acoustic machines struggle with loud orchestral passages. Were these sound-boxes designed to limit the dynamics where the reproduction would hit peaks to prevent distortion? They are wonderfully (albeit simply) engineered but somehow the untamed two-springs serve most music better, if at times the lack of restraint does give rise to shrill high frequencies.

[Steve]

Oh, I spot that there have already been a further two replies since I typed my last, including one from Graham. Thanks, chaps. This is all very interesting and I'm glad that I am not alone in experiencing this. Listening to a few of the four-spring s/boxes after the two-springs was a bit similar to someone putting a thin curtain over the horn. Everything appeared to be more muffled and softer in reproduction. I note that Orchorsol concurs with me about the "damping" for heavy orchestral passages.

I can see some protracted experiments taking place over the next few days. I look forward to hearing more reports!

[emgcr]

Hello Steve---a very interesting debate and one that has been going on for over 80 years I think ! One obvious experiment might be to play a 4 spring with only two springs---something I had never thought to do. Weight, of course, is still a big factor but by using a counterbalance one could then approximate like with like ?

[soundgen]

So many EMG soundboxes !

[soundgen]

Which one of you bought this !


http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Expert-Senior ... 4177fd884a