Spontaneous Grouping

[fran604g]

George, I like it! That's a great grouping. I look forward to watching the parts move.

Fran

[phonogfp]

So my question is whether you'd mind giving us a bit of a primer on what each of those (N and C) is like to live with, perhaps highlighting their strong and weak points?

I know the N is alone amongst Columbias in having an end gate, and that it has a fiber gear that is troublesome. But when they're right, are they good runners? Quiet? Reliable?

As for the C, well, I've never even seen one in real life. Where do they slide in, perhaps in comparison to the A? And what was it about this particular one that was so right for you, having said that you had been waiting to find such an example for a long time?

I'm sure many of us will be interested to hear back in this when you have a little time.

Thanks.

Well, Peter, I'm not sure too many will be interested in my musings on the N and the C, but being the self-indulgent fool that I am, I'll happily prattle on and on..., under the pretext of being an obliging, helpful kind of guy...!

The March 2015 issue of The Antique Phonograph contains a 5-page article (with 7 illustrations) on the Type N covering its historical aspects. There's even a "One Collector's Perspective" where I shared my innermost thoughts on collecting the N. I won't cover that ground again, but I'll gladly answer your questions about the N's motor. In case we have relatively new collectors patiently reading this thread, here's an example of the machine in question:

Note that this particular example had a retailer's decal (in this case, the Chicago Talking Machine Company) applied to the lower right portion of the Graphophone decal. Ordinarily, the Type N will not carry such an appended decal, but will show a Washington, D.C. address.

By the way (and as noted in the article), the Type N was one of two Graphophones equipped with an endgate. The other was the Graphophone Grand (Type GG).

Type Ns are early enough to have been originally equipped with gutta-percha reproducers. These are attractive to collectors for their scarcity, but they don't play very well compared to the aluminum models. If you're going to play a Type N, I'd recommend substituting an aluminum reproducer.

The motor of the N is a lovely piece of craftsmanship. Here's an outtake from the article (a better view can be seen in The Antique Phonograph as noted above):

The fiber gear can be plainly seen, along with all the brass and steel spoked gears and cast brass spring barrel. This motor is fairly quiet, and runs with a subtle rumble unlike any other talking machine motor I've encountered. It's a powerful unit - - just check the width of that mainspring. The N was the last of the Graphophones manufactured with little or no regard to cost-effectiveness. When the Type A appeared about one year later, it did everything the N did for only $25 rather than $40. Ooops - there I go with history again... All in all, the N remains a serviceable machine capable of playing records well when equipped with an aluminum reproducer.

The Type C has always been one of my favorites. I wrote an article on them about 25 years ago pointing out that the C is the only "business machine" from the 1890s which can be obtained for less than the cost of a new automobile. I believe that remains unchanged.

I plan on writing an article on the Type C Graphophones, so I won't go into much detail here, but I think most of us know that the C was marketed as the "Universal." It was meant for use either as an entertainment machine (its massive 3-mainspring motor could run for one hour at the then-standard 120 rpm) or as a business machine with its 6-inch mandrel and blanks, and its disengagement device (a holdover from the earlier Bell-Tainter machines). For all this, the Type C cost only $10 more than the old N: $50. Of course, the Type A had pretty much supplanted the N well before the appearance of the Type C. The "Universal" was and is much more machine than the Type A. After all, it was twice the price at the time. The 3-sping motor is a beauty, and its a testament to its quality that it was used in slightly updated form in Columbia's machines for 12 years.

As for why this particular Type C appealed to me, number one was condition. It is also an early production example, as evidenced by its three machined spring barrels (very soon these would give way to sheet metal) and the short-lived decal on the front listing the Broadway & 27th Street address. This machine also came with a faded green felt cover which envelopes the entire machine when the lid is in place. (I can't decide whether I prefer to display it closed up with this felt cover or not. ) Finally, it was at the Union show in 2007 that I had purchased a rare tin swarf tray for a Type C, and that started me looking for a nice example of the machine with which to pair it.

I'm sure I've outlived my welcome with all this. I hope I've answered your questions, and I further hope that some will enjoy an upcoming article on the Type C later in 2015 or in 2016.

George P.

[fran604g]

Very interesting, George, thank you!

Best,
Fran

[FloridaClay]

I am curious about the "belfry." Do you live in an old church or school converted to a residence (which I think would be really neat), or is it just a figure of speech?

Clay

[PeterF]

One of the great advantages of living three time zones away from George Paul, is that one can pose a question before turning in, and awaken to find a greatly informative and well-written answer - to read with one's morning coffee.

Thanks, George!

A comment, and a follow up question:

- wow, a spring motor that will run for an HOUR!?!?!

- was the intent of the fiber gear noise reduction, or something else?

It's funny, when I first started collecting, my mentor was really not a fan of Columbia cylinder machines - complaining about their noisy motors and other deficiencies. He is a collect-it-all sort of guy, so he has plenty of them around, but tends to diminish them in conversation ("...and then there's that poor little Columbia..." "...let's listen to that record together, no not on the Columbia, bring it over here to this Triumph..." etc).

So I disregarded them for many years, acquiring them only by accident or when presented at a great price, and never actively seeking any - other than a huge, wacky (and ultimately, disappointing) BC.

But I find them very interesting, and in many cases far more handsome than the Edison equivalent. And as I jokingly said earlier, when the nickel plating is in nice shape and polished up, they really do look marvelous - shiny is good! Plus the cabinetry for many models is far more decorative and handsome as well.

As for performance, well, my experience has been uneven...like the tone of most Columbias I've owned. The only one which hasn't had nasty flutter (perhaps describable as "warble") is the BE, which is a real superstar amongst graphophones in my opinion, because it has it all: small size (like an Edison Standard), nickeled bed plate, ornate cabinet, decorated upper works (flowers, etc), lots of spring power (triple spring, IIRC), and the lyric reproducer in its handsome carriage.

I've heard somewhat recently that a lot of flutter in Columbias can be cured by polishing the governor disk to remove surface bumps created by oil residue and governor pad remnants left there from long periods of disuse. I've yet to try it but hope to see if it works.

Ok, time for another cup of joe.

Thanks again George. Can't wait to see the article on the C.

[phonogfp]

I am curious about the "belfry." Do you live in an old church or school converted to a residence (which I think would be really neat), or is it just a figure of speech?

Clay

Just a figure of speech, I'm afraid. When we converted the attic 10 years ago, there was room to allow 9-foot ceilings in the "phonograph room" and still have an attic above that; accessible through a pull-down door. Consequently, we still have an attic at the top of the house, and a large space below for you-know-what.

I could have called it a "phonograph room," but my attraction to the romantic discouraged that. I'd had "phonograph rooms" before. A friend in Florida houses his collection in what he calls a "gallery." That was better, but of course I didn't want to usurp my friend's terminology. Nor did I want to suggest art treasure and highbrow associations. It occurred to me that a "belfry" is commonly associated with a structure or tower holding bells. Talking machines have horns, and most of them have bells... And of course having bats in one's belfry implies insanity... Need I go on?

George P.

[phonogfp]

One of the great advantages of living three time zones away from George Paul, is that one can pose a question before turning in, and awaken to find a greatly informative and well-written answer - to read with one's morning coffee.

Thanks, George!

You're very welcome, Peter. I suspect that many folks wish they lived even more than three time zones away from me.

A comment, and a follow up question:

- wow, a spring motor that will run for an HOUR!?!?!

You betcha. Catalog write-ups of the period called it "...the hour-run clockwork motor." I believe that this remarkable power-plant grew out of the earlier...ooops - - that's for the article!

- was the intent of the fiber gear noise reduction, or something else?

I believe it was purely for noise reduction. Graphophones (cylinder and disc) used fiber gears for many years, and Victor employed them early on as well.

It's funny, when I first started collecting, my mentor was really not a fan of Columbia cylinder machines - complaining about their noisy motors and other deficiencies. He is a collect-it-all sort of guy, so he has plenty of them around, but tends to diminish them in conversation ("...and then there's that poor little Columbia..." "...let's listen to that record together, no not on the Columbia, bring it over here to this Triumph..." etc).

The prejudiced attitude toward Graphophones on the part of collectors in the 1960/70s/80s has been discussed here before. We were instructed to dislike them by Read & Welch, and many collectors did just that. Admittedly, the pot metal carriages (and sometimes upper castings) didn't endear cylinder Graphophones to collectors. I must admit, though, that a swollen carriage has more than once enabled me to purchase some wonderful machines at attractive prices. I've usually had these machines working within a day or two, so it's another example of the advantages of educating one's self.

But I find them very interesting, and in many cases far more handsome than the Edison equivalent. And as I jokingly said earlier, when the nickel plating is in nice shape and polished up, they really do look marvelous - shiny is good! Plus the cabinetry for many models is far more decorative and handsome as well.

Agreed. The 1897 models I showed earlier in this thread are very plain, although that too has a charm of its own. But from mid-1898, Graphophone cabinets grew columns and gingerbread at an alarming rate. Edison cabinetry never approached that of Columbia until the Amberola/Diamond Disc era.

As for performance, well, my experience has been uneven...like the tone of most Columbias I've owned. The only one which hasn't had nasty flutter (perhaps describable as "warble") is the BE, which is a real superstar amongst graphophones in my opinion, because it has it all: small size (like an Edison Standard), nickeled bed plate, ornate cabinet, decorated upper works (flowers, etc), lots of spring power (triple spring, IIRC), and the lyric reproducer in its handsome carriage.

Yes - and all for $30. The same price as the single-mainspring Edison Home. What would Read & Welch say to that?

I've heard somewhat recently that a lot of flutter in Columbias can be cured by polishing the governor disk to remove surface bumps created by oil residue and governor pad remnants left there from long periods of disuse. I've yet to try it but hope to see if it works.

The lead weights of Graphophone motors can also be responsible. As they oxidize and shed their dandruff, unequal balance can result. A digital scale or a balance scale can reveal problems solved by a drop of glue or other hardening substance on the inner surface of the lighter weight(s).

Thanks again George. Can't wait to see the article on the C.

Again, you're very welcome.

George P.

[Zwebie]

George,

What a Great grouping!
I love it!

Bob S.

[phonogfp]

Thanks, Bob - - I'm glad you enjoyed it.

Does anyone else have a "seasonal" phonograph display they'd like to share?

George P.

[Lucius1958]

Now we know our Graphophone A-B-Cs.....

Bill