The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

phonodesbois wrote:Hi Enrico,
If you need different pics, just let me know. (fyi: the turntable is quite heavy around 2.2kg).

Thank you very much Jeff, yours is definetely the right turntable.

Enrico wrote:

phonodesbois wrote:Hi Enrico,
If you need different pics, just let me know. (fyi: the turntable is quite heavy around 2.2kg).

Thank you very much Jeff, yours is definetely the right turntable.

Enrico,

The difference between your machine & Jeff's is not so much the turntables, but the fact that his motor is mounted higher than yours.

Did someone put the wrong felt pads under the motor board?

JerryVan wrote:

Enrico wrote:

phonodesbois wrote:Hi Enrico,
If you need different pics, just let me know. (fyi: the turntable is quite heavy around 2.2kg).

Thank you very much Jeff, yours is definetely the right turntable.

Enrico,

The difference between your machine & Jeff's is not so much the turntables, but the fact that his motor is mounted higher than yours.

Dear Jerry,
Yes, I noticed it and in fact the motorboard is now mounted differently from the photos I shared initially. However, in my model it is not possible to bring the motorboard to the same height as Jeff's, but this is not the problem. If you look at our two turntables, Jeff's is different. I noticed that I need that turntable. Mine has the central part that protrudes lower than the ring, and it is not a good thing.
Thanks,
Enrico

VanEpsFan1914 wrote:Did someone put the wrong felt pads under the motor board?

Yes, and they have been already removed from me.
Thanks,
Enrico

phonodesbois wrote:Hi Enrico,
If you need different pics, just let me know. (fyi: the turntable is quite heavy around 2.2kg).

Enrico m it seems to me that if you had this turntable wouldn't it sit even lower on the spindle than yours ? and contact the bumps more ? Why would the turntable you have with the machine not be correct ? perhaps there is another reason for your problem ?

Enrico wrote:
Dear Jerry,
Yes, I noticed it and in fact the motorboard is now mounted differently from the photos I shared initially. However, in my model it is not possible to bring the motorboard to the same height as Jeff's, but this is not the problem. If you look at our two turntables, Jeff's is different. I noticed that I need that turntable. Mine has the central part that protrudes lower than the ring, and it is not a good thing.
Thanks,
Enrico

Enrico,

Your turntable and the other one pictured, are in fact the same turntable. The only difference is that the other one has an added piece. It has a "riser", held on with three screws, that elevates the ring where it rides on the bearings. This appears to make the central part shorter, but in fact, it makes the ring higher. That actually might help you, but the question is then, will the drive pin on your spindle shaft still engage with your turntable if you were to use such a table?

Does the machine have a spindle ball bearing in the bottom ?

This ball-bearing device was fitted for a time about 1905 to the G & T 12-inch turntable models, but was discontinued because it proved noisy, and was replaced by the much simpler cup-shaped support, fixed on the spindle, which mated with the ring cast in the turntable. However, for the ball-bearing support, the ring had an extra ring attached, held on by three small countersunk screws in the centre section. I attach a photo of one which, as it happens, is also a restoration project, and you will see that the extra ring has a felt spacer under it. This may or may not have been standard. I cannot see any screw holes in your turntable so it could be that it is the wrong one, from a later machine. Fortunately, the basic turntable is the same, and it would not be beyond the wit of man to make and fit a suitable ring, and the correct thickness of the felt spacer could be found by experiment.

Soundgen's point about the ball bearing at the bottom of the spindle is pertinent; low turntables are often caused by the loss of this ball, which could have dropped out unnoticed during a previous dismantling of the motor.

Oedipus wrote:This ball-bearing device was fitted for a time about 1905 to the G & T 12-inch turntable models, but was discontinued because it proved noisy, and was replaced by the much simpler cup-shaped support, fixed on the spindle, which mated with the ring cast in the turntable. However, for the ball-bearing support, the ring had an extra ring attached, held on by three small countersunk screws in the centre section. I attach a photo of one which, as it happens, is also a restoration project, and you will see that the extra ring has a felt spacer under it. This may or may not have been standard. I cannot see any screw holes in your turntable so it could be that it is the wrong one, from a later machine. Fortunately, the basic turntable is the same, and it would not be beyond the wit of man to make and fit a suitable ring, and the correct thickness of the felt spacer could be found by experiment.

Soundgen's point about the ball bearing at the bottom of the spindle is pertinent; low turntables are often caused by the loss of this ball, which could have dropped out unnoticed during a previous dismantling of the motor.

Dear Oedipus,

I apologize for the late reply. I don't check my emails frequently during this time.

Thank you very much for your explanation. It's all clear now. My turntable lacks the extra ring visible in your photo.

All the best,
Enrico