The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

Edison's electric recording equipment was provided by the General Electric company. McKenzie Cottrell (many of whose papers I acquired back in the 1970's) was an engineer involved with the Edison electric recording program of 1927-9 as well as the 1925-7 Brunswick and 1926-7 Gennett programs.

The reminiscences of Cottrell and several other General Electric recording engineers are preserved in audiotaped interviews.

They offer a good deal of insight into the recording processes of the time, when studied by those with a basic knowledge of General Electric's commercial product lines of those days.

Oddly enough, the extant electric Diamond Disc cutting head appears to have been made from a highly modified 100 loudspeaker balanced armature unit! On the other hand, the existing photographs that we have of the early Gennett electric recording system show what appears to be a 104 Electrodynamic loudspeaker mounted in a box coupled to an acoustic cutting head through a rubber tube. The amplifier associated with this set-up is small, and Cottrell's notes show that the B+ battery supply was but 500V, suggesting that the output tube used was a UX-210, or at best, a pair of 210's in parallel.

The early Brunswick electric equipment (that famous for terrible distortion) was also supplied with but 500V on its plates. The improved equipment used 1500V, suggesting that a 210 output stage (1.25 watts) was replaced with a UV-203A output stage (12-15 watts) The increase in amplifier headroom can account for much of the improved quality of the post 1926 Brunswick waxings.

Cottrell complained at one point of the Edison recordists not paying attention to the condition of their dry "C" (grid bias) batteries, an of a noticeable increase in distortion on some Edison sides recorded with improper bias voltages.

Another 12" Edison record... but this one an actual DD! 1 bid with reserve not met at $250. Would be neat to have, but can't right now.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... 0315428285

phonophan79 wrote:Another 12" Edison record... but this one an actual DD! 1 bid with reserve not met at $250. Would be neat to have, but can't right now.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... 0315428285

Certainly interesting because of it's rarity and the 12" size among other things. However they are pretty disappointing to listen too as you hear just a short sample of each selection. You are just starting to enjoy it when it cuts out.

I really wonder about the sellers statement, "There are some scratches on the right side (see pic) with NO hung up grooves. The disc plays LOUD and CLEAR" One could not miss the gouge in the middle of the right side which must sound pretty unpleasant.

Those dealer sample discs are pretty neat. I'd never pay that kind of money for one. I've had the opportunity to hear a couple of these another collector has, unfortunately the tracks are all dubbed, some of them very badly, so they tend to not sound nearly as good as the regular DD issue.

Sean

Oddly enough, the extant electric Diamond Disc cutting head appears to have been made from a highly modified 100 loudspeaker balanced armature unit! On the other hand, the
The early Brunswick electric equipment (that famous for terrible distortion) was also supplied with but 500V on its plates. The improved equipment used 1500V, suggesting that a 210 output stage (1.25 watts) was replaced with a UV-203A output stage (12-15 watts) The increase in amplifier headroom can account for much of the improved quality of the post 1926 Brunswick waxings.

Cottrell complained at one point of the Edison recordists not paying attention to the condition of their dry "C&" (grid bias) batteries, an of a noticeable increase in distortion on some Edison sides recorded with improper bias voltages.

This is fascinating. I have always wondered what Edison was using and why some of the later electricals are not as good as the earlier ones. Wyatt Markus has several electric DD's on his website, and the recording of Room With A View by B A Rolfe's Orchestra on 52462 is really a very good recording indeed: fresh "C" batteries and proper grid bias rules The use of a loudspeaker unit as a cutter was fairly widespread. Herbert Berliner of Canadian Compo used a Baldwin unit in his system...as did many of the early electrical experimenters.

While If I had the record I wouldn't mind getting that price, I find it a bit odd to pay that kind of money for something already known to have lousy surface and somewhat poor quality. I guess some collectors just have to "have it and any price", but for me there is a limit and that one is way over it. You can hear Martinelli sing the same piece on a good Victor for nearly nothing. In fact I have it here and no one seemed to want it during my on going auctions of electrical victors. What is the thought process behind this any price will do philosophy.

Well, a 12" dealer's sample Diamond Disc is NOT a 12" Victor Red Seal . . . it is what it is, not what it isn't. Why is a Class M worth $25K or better and a VV-IV worth $150? They are both old phonographs? The price is driven by supply and demand. As collectors we must resist projecting and imposing our personal 'predujices' on these artifacts. Certainly we can have areas of interest and in reality our personal tastes to play a role in what we prefer to collect, but beauty -- and value -- is in the eye of the beholder.
I prefer to think that all these artifacts are worth owning/preserving -- what will be considered rare and valuable in another 100 or 200 years simply due to the passage of time . . . 'White Chistmas', Hawaiian, 'Silver Threads Among The Gold'?

John M