The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

briankeith wrote:I would also not consider the following five as off-brand phonographs: Brunswick, Cheney, Pathé, Silvertone, and Sonora. Opinions?

My personal opinion is that from the above only Pathé deserves a permanent place in the annals of phonograph history. I am thinking here of the legendary Pathé Céleste from around 1900, for example.

To me, the others are late-comers which added a few fashionable gimmicks and design variations, but are altogether technically and historically of minor interest.

Orthophonic - you should post some info and photos of yours! This EBay seller does not have any manufactures information on the one he/she is selling in Canada.

briankeith wrote: I am still seeking a good tonearm assembly for my Charles W. Shonk Mag-Ni-Tone and having no luck what-so-ever, even at the shows.

Can you post a picture of the tonearm?
I have no idea what these tonearms look like, & probably most other people dont either, so you might get lucky if someone recognises it as something they've got in their spare parts bin.

Starkton wrote:

briankeith wrote:I would also not consider the following five as off-brand phonographs: Brunswick, Cheney, Pathé, Silvertone, and Sonora. Opinions?

My personal opinion is that from the above only Pathé deserves a permanent place in the annals of phonograph history. I am thinking here of the legendary Pathé Céleste from around 1900, for example.

To me, the others are late-comers which added a few fashionable gimmicks and design variations, but are altogether technically and historically of minor interest.

You have to think of the two Pathé branches as separate things:

European Pathé = major manufacturer

American Pathé = secondary brand

gramophoneshane - I bought the Mag-Ni-Phone totally missing the tonearm and reproducer. I found only this blurry photo.

Starkton wrote:

briankeith wrote:I would also not consider the following five as off-brand phonographs: Brunswick, Cheney, Pathé, Silvertone, and Sonora. Opinions?

My personal opinion is that from the above only Pathé deserves a permanent place in the annals of phonograph history. I am thinking here of the legendary Pathé Céleste from around 1900, for example.

To me, the others are late-comers which added a few fashionable gimmicks and design variations, but are altogether technically and historically of minor interest.

I totally agree.
While Brunswick, Cheney & Sonora all sold pretty well in USA & even in Australia, their success was fairly short lived, and they never had the worldwide success of the big three, nor were they ever at the forefront of cabinet or reproductive design.
I guess the exception to this could be Brunswick with their early electrical recording & reproduction, however they were still out-done by Victor right from the start.
In reality, Sonora was merely a cabinet maker who built machines using imported running gear from Switzerland (like hundreds of other companies around the world), & Silvertone were only ever sold in USA through Sears, and again, neither company ever did anything that had any effect on the world gramophone stage. Both companies success was only due to their ability to offer relatively good quality product at a competetive price.

Pathé on the other hand, were an innovative company who probably had equal (if not more) success in Europe & other parts of the world than Columbia, and that success spanned from cylinder phonographs in the 1890s to disc gramophones (Pathephones) into the 1930s and beyond. Outside of USA, they survived by becoming part of EMI in the same way as Columbia did, and players under the Columbia & Pathé names were available around the world at least until the late 1960s, which is something Cheney, Sonora, Silvertone & even Brunswick never achieved.

My personal belief is that the "big three" (Edison, Columbia & Victor-incorporating Berliner, UK German & French HMV) should have been the "big four" to include Pathé because these 4 companies were world leaders from their inception, and everything else is "off-brand" regardless of high sales figures.

I may have miss-spelled the name. It is Mag-Ni-Phone by Charles W. Shonk. The same Shonk that made the old litho beer trays back in the early 1900's....... Sorry about that.

briankeith wrote:I may have miss-spelled the name. It is Mag-Ni-Phone by Charles W. Shonk. The same Shonk that made the old litho beer trays back in the early 1900's....... Sorry about that.

Does this one help in identifying the correct tone arm? (it may be your actual machine, and the search is going circular).
http://www.nadeausauction.com/auctionda ... /377_1.JPG
I was just doing the Google image search which you are probably doing too. It's a good challenge to see if one can find answers to questions posted on the TMF.

gramophoneshane wrote:

Starkton wrote:

briankeith wrote:I would also not consider the following five as off-brand phonographs: Brunswick, Cheney, Pathé, Silvertone, and Sonora. Opinions?

My personal opinion is that from the above only Pathé deserves a permanent place in the annals of phonograph history. I am thinking here of the legendary Pathé Céleste from around 1900, for example.

To me, the others are late-comers which added a few fashionable gimmicks and design variations, but are altogether technically and historically of minor interest.

I totally agree.
While Brunswick, Cheney & Sonora all sold pretty well in USA & even in Australia, their success was fairly short lived, and they never had the worldwide success of the big three, nor were they ever at the forefront of cabinet or reproductive design.
I guess the exception to this could be Brunswick with their early electrical recording & reproduction, however they were still out-done by Victor right from the start.
In reality, Sonora was merely a cabinet maker who built machines using imported running gear from Switzerland (like hundreds of other companies around the world), & Silvertone were only ever sold in USA through Sears, and again, neither company ever did anything that had any effect on the world gramophone stage. Both companies success was only due to their ability to offer relatively good quality product at a competetive price.

Pathé on the other hand, were an innovative company who probably had equal (if not more) success in Europe & other parts of the world than Columbia, and that success spanned from cylinder phonographs in the 1890s to disc gramophones (Pathephones) into the 1930s and beyond. Outside of USA, they survived by becoming part of EMI in the same way as Columbia did, and players under the Columbia & Pathé names were available around the world at least until the late 1960s, which is something Cheney, Sonora, Silvertone & even Brunswick never achieved.

My personal belief is that the "big three" (Edison, Columbia & Victor-incorporating Berliner, UK German & French HMV) should have been the "big four" to include Pathé because these 4 companies were world leaders from their inception, and everything else is "off-brand" regardless of high sales figures.

I agree with the above statement, these big name guys moved mountains back in the day, but my personal belief is that no machine should, big name or "off brand" should be overlooked. Im especially talking about off brands because its so often that we buy big names because of their value and name, but lets not forget the small guys...so what, they werent as popular, but I can guarantee you that there are some rare ones out there, and why not save them ALL if we can, to preserbe for future generations, big or small named. Im not a collector of the fancy or the rare, I enjoy fixing broke common mans machines because they are a part of this countrys history that shouldnt be forgotten because of their name.

To love this hobby is to love the common and the uncommon.