The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

Inigo wrote:It has by design that awful tracking angle common with this type of tonearm. And as the soundbox falls in the middle of the tonearm, inverting the gooseneck to the right hand (soundbox also inverted) has almost no effect in the bad tracking angle at the start of a 12" record. A lifebelt would improve the tracking, and still it would be better to have a special gooseneck made to request with the adequate angle instead of 180 degrees, maybe 135 degrees would track better... A new project indeed...

If you don't want to remake the tonearm, you could always remake the flange on the back of the soundbox . This really does reduce record wear and sounds better...

http://forum.talkingmachine.info/viewto ... 6&start=10

Yes, that's a clever idea. I also used it with my Columbia 113, which has also a very bad track design. I substituted the original dried red rubber back joint in the soundbox by another made out of silicone, which I gave a wedged shape like your cork example. Thanks. That silicone wedged rubber joint hardened in a few months, and I am planning to make another. Your idea using cork instead of silicone looks easy to do and looks well... Thanks!
And it is reversible, so no harm is done to the original... Very clever.

Steve wrote:

epigramophone wrote:Of course it has an internal horn, albeit of rather crude design.

As others have said, they are not popular with UK collectors.

The 58 has a substantial cast iron internal horn and not simply a ply construct using the motorboard to form the top of the horn as in the Style 1 / 1A and Style 3 etc.

The motor does not interrupt the horn in other words.

The Model 58 horn was still crude compared with the alternatives on offer in 1922/23. It cost £11 in oak and £12 in mahogany. The same money would have bought the Model 24, £11 with a Morning Glory horn or £12 with a wood horn. I know which I would have bought.

jamiegramo wrote:
If you don't want to remake the tonearm, you could always remake the flange on the back of the soundbox . This really does reduce record wear and sounds better...

http://forum.talkingmachine.info/viewto ... 6&start=10

Very clever! I'll try it on my Victor VV-VI.

epigramophone wrote:

Steve wrote:

epigramophone wrote:Of course it has an internal horn, albeit of rather crude design.

As others have said, they are not popular with UK collectors.

The 58 has a substantial cast iron internal horn and not simply a ply construct using the motorboard to form the top of the horn as in the Style 1 / 1A and Style 3 etc.

The motor does not interrupt the horn in other words.

The Model 58 horn was still crude compared with the alternatives on offer in 1922/23. It cost £11 in oak and £12 in mahogany. The same money would have bought the Model 24, £11 with a Morning Glory horn or £12 with a wood horn. I know which I would have bought.

No, just as back in those days, your wife would have had other ideas. External horns were very much passe by the 1920s.

Inigo wrote:Yes, that's a clever idea. I also used it with my Columbia 113, which has also a very bad track design. I substituted the original dried red rubber back joint in the soundbox by another made out of silicone, which I gave a wedged shape like your cork example. Thanks. That silicone wedged rubber joint hardened in a few months, and I am planning to make another. Your idea using cork instead of silicone looks easy to do and looks well... Thanks!
And it is reversible, so no harm is done to the original... Very clever.

Thanks Inigo. The composite type cork I used is very pliant like rubber and silicon aswell as being lightweight and easy to sand. I was able to get the minimum tracking error possible for the length of tonearm.

I think that whatever you do it would be difficult to make the tracking much worse!

Jamie

soundgen wrote:Virtually unsaleable in the UK unless you wanted the soundbox or motor , I could let you have one for £20 if you want to collect it , no soundbox or winding handle

nobody wants one for £20 ?

No because the soundbox and winding handle will never match the machine and will probably cost more than it's worth to complete.

Thanks Jamie, I'll try to find a cork like yours and give it a try... It's an elegant reversible way to improve the original design, kind of attachment. Wasn't the famous lifebelt also an attachment for the same purpose?
I will apply this truck to the Columbia no 15 soundbox of my 113 portable. There I use glue for the assembly of the joint, soundbox and back collar piece, for the original six screws cannot be installed on the wedged joint. I keep them with the machine, and it is also reversible, installing the factory red rubber plain joint.

Steve wrote:No because the soundbox and winding handle will never match the machine and will probably cost more than it's worth to complete.

Unable to find a winding handle or a soundbox for a mass produced machine?