The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

Congratulations! That is a stunning machine.

Andreas

+1 on what Andreas said. It is an earlier model that was set up for a concert reproducer. Well done Leo.

gramophone78 wrote:+1 on what Andreas said. It is an earlier model that was set up for a concert reproducer. Well done Leo.

ahhh... this would explain the wear on the tone arm (it does not match the reproducer).

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-X7Zb ... G_1706.jpg
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-Zoeo ... m+wear.jpg

so I should start looking for a Concert reproducer? funny because I tried finding information on the Concert reproducer last week but without success. these suckers are hard to find...

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-9kO- ... G_1711.jpg
the paper label on the bottom has the March 1st 1902 date
i'd really like to nail the exact year.

Le0 wrote:

gramophone78 wrote:+1 on what Andreas said. It is an earlier model that was set up for a concert reproducer. Well done Leo.

ahhh... this would explain the wear on the tone arm (it does not match the reproducer).

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-X7Zb ... G_1706.jpg
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-Zoeo ... m+wear.jpg

so I should start looking for a Concert reproducer? funny because I tried finding information on the Concert reproducer last week but without success. these suckers are hard to find...

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-9kO- ... G_1711.jpg
the paper label on the bottom has the March 1st 1902 date
i'd really like to nail the exact year.

No, the wear on the tone arm (touch mark) would be about the same as the reproducer center is unchanged. It can be slightly inward or toward the tone arm's center diameter (as in your case) "if" a concert was ever used for a period of time. However, the Exhibition may have been "upgraded" that the time the machine was new. Clearly the back bracket was factory drilled for a concert. However, a customer had the opinion to pay more for the exhibition.
You can buy a concert. However, keep in mind they are not as good sounding and are a "heavy" reproducer. In truth, they were inadequate by the time the number series was out.
What you will achieve by having a concert on this machine is.....having your tone arm (U tube) level while in play position. That's it. So, you have to ask yourself if the money spent (not cheap) is worth that.

The Victor data book will tell you the year,etc...Sorry, my copy is out on loan. I just hope I get it back.... . If you post your machine's serial number, I'm sure a member can provide you with that info. A very sweet machine. A favorite of mine and I think smarter looking than a Vic.6. However, this is just my opinion.

gramophone78 wrote:No, the wear on the tone arm (touch mark) would be about the same as the reproducer center is unchanged. It can be slightly inward or toward the tone arm's center diameter (as in your case) "if" a concert was ever used for a period of time. However, the Exhibition may have been "upgraded" that the time the machine was new. Clearly the back bracket was factory drilled for a concert. However, a customer had the opinion to pay more for the exhibition.
You can buy a concert. However, keep in mind they are not as good sounding and are a "heavy" reproducer. In truth, they were inadequate by the time the number series was out.
What you will achieve by having a concert on this machine is.....having your tone arm (U tube) level while in play position. That's it. So, you have to ask yourself if the money spent (not cheap) is worth that.

The Victor data book will tell you the year,etc...Sorry, my copy is out on loan. I just hope I get it back.... . If you post your machine's serial number, I'm sure a member can provide you with that info. A very sweet machine. A favorite of mine and I think smarter looking than a Vic.6. However, this is just my opinion.

ok, but it would still be nice to get hold of one... I think that's the point of collecting?
I can always use the Exhibition for playback.
I included a link to my serial number (#24263) in my last post.

Leo,

Firstly, the pictures confirm you have an excellent quality machine. Nothing more than an occaisonal dusting is needed for the finish.

I too like to have some extra reproducers and switch them between machines. However if I decide to sell, the reproducer that came with the machine goes with it. For that reason I keep a spreadsheet in excel recording every no. on the machine which in addition to the reproducer number. You might want to consider that.

Regarding machines being "drilled" for concert reproducer, or exhibition, I've got Victor machines with two sets of holes, right above eachother for mounting the back bracket. Does yours? I assume that's the explanation for the extra holes then?

Regardless of whether the machine was "drilled" for an exhibition or concert, I think it could well have had that exhibition from day one. I seem to recall that the catalogues of the period offer machines at the same price with "choice of concert or exhibition reproducer and choice of brass bell or petaled horns, i.e. an earlier version of a Vic 1-5 could have easily been purchased new with a petaled horn and concert reproducer, although that seems like an odd combination. Perhaps someone else can confirm or set me straight?

Finally, why on earth would anyone choose a concert reproducer when the exhibition was available at the same price? Never understood that.

Le0 wrote:I took the pictures indoors finally, with some sketchy lighting solution but it worked somewhat ok...
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-JKXh ... G_1686.JPG
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-JX48 ... G_1684.JPG
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGODIb4v7-M[/youtube]

It's a truly lovely piece!

And please allow me to thank you for not including in your YouTube video a half minute's worth of winding first before we get to see your new acquisition in action.

Leo,

Per the Victor Data Book your IV would be a type M. They shipped between March 1905 and October 1912 with serial numbers from 13,077 to 46,299. The lowest serial # for a IV was 4,143. Extrapolating from the table showing the numbers shipped each year, it looks like your #24,263 would likely have been shipped in late 1905 (assuming I have not screwed up the math).

Clay