The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

Here are some videos from YouTube channel by a user named "THEVICTROLAGUY", that I have seen with great interests for the past few days. He is demonstrating his contraption which he calls "The Canaphonic Archivette". Basically this is a plug you can set on top of cylinder phonograph reproducers with microphone in it.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqLQhq0b6jY[/youtube]
One of the demonstration videos with an early Brown Wax Cylinder. There are plenty of demonstration videos he posted on his channel anyway.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8VB9B9ibZY[/youtube]
It also can be used on certain disc machines as well, apparently.

Now, as for the quality of audio derived from this attachment, it is obvious that this device sort of muffles higher frequencies and emphasizes rumble pretty much, but otherwise, the overall audio quality is pretty decent and not that different from the sound played on old acoustic machines.

This is certainly not comparable to the high-end players like Archeophones or the like, but at least gives a quick-fix solution to desires of making audio files from cylinders. I mean, how much time we have suffered from low quality audios on YouTube videos or MP3 files made in a quick-and-dirty way, badly distorting their sound quality and tarnishing the overall impressions?

I know there was a very similar device called Phonolink in U.K., and I thought that was very good when I heard samples from it, but I wonder if it is still sold to the market these days...

Any more thoughts from all of you?

The PhonoLink is indeed still sold, I bought one earlier this year. The sound quality of the resulting audio file is comparable to playing the record acoustically.

These are some of the records I have transferred using the PhonoLink: http://brandonlangford.com/archive.html

Interesting indeed. The quality on the disk machine is quite good. I expect you might be able to get rid of some of the cylinder rumble with judicious uses of frequency filters.

Clay

It's certainly not an Archeophone but to my admittedly untrained ear the sound quality is really excellent, especially considering a conventional reproducer is being used rather than a lightweight electric pickup. It definitely sounds richer and clearer than with a horn. This sort of thing should be a boon for those who want to digitize records without going to the very significant expense of an archeophone. The quality may not be equal but I like what I hear, and it looks like it would be a snap to use.

Regarding the cylinder machine it's an interesting idea. I'd never thought of attaching a microphone directly that way. With a little ingenuity, one could devise a method of attaching a microphone of one's choosing, which could produce even better results. Microphones have all kinds of different characteristics that work better or worse in certain applications.

Brown wax with a model C? Brown cardboard with a steel needle? In terms of sound quality though, this is surprisingly good. A microphone stuffed down a horn using a sock or towel can do as well. The main issue is finding a microphone that does not distort at such high sound levels.

There are devices more sophisticated than this, but less costly than an Archeophone. See the Owl and Act reproducers here:
http://www.edisonshop.com/reproducers/ducer.html

The problem with that approach is that they pick up motor noise rather too well. It can be filtered out, but whether this also removes some of the music depends on the quality of the motor and the frequency range of the original recording.

dd2u wrote:There are devices more sophisticated than this, but less costly than an Archeophone. See the Owl and Act reproducers here:
http://www.edisonshop.com/reproducers/ducer.html

The only problem is they are always out of stock. The website says a production run is supposed to happen this month, but I can recall seeing that message before and it never happened. I've been trying to buy one for several years now. The PhonoLink seems to be the only option at the moment.

Anybody tried just dropping a small, light-weight mike down into the horn?

Clay

I have one of the pickups made by John Petty a few decades ago. Here's a link to a few different examples for both C and Amberola B-C reproducer carriages:
http://www.christerhamp.se/phono/petty.html

These were handmade, pretty simple in design and could probably be replicated by anyone with some degree of skill. The design could be further simplified, in my opinion.
I'm very happy with mine.
Bob

barnettrp21122 wrote:I have one of the pickups made by John Petty a few decades ago. Here's a link to a few different examples for both C and Amberola B-C reproducer carriages:
http://www.christerhamp.se/phono/petty.html

These were handmade, pretty simple in design and could probably be replicated by anyone with some degree of skill. The design could be further simplified, in my opinion.
I'm very happy with mine.
Bob

ive also wanted one of those electric reproducers (http://www.edisonshop.com/reproducers/ducer.html) for ages!, i like how it can play both 2 and 4 minute cylinders clearly with good clarity through a amplifier!, but as i remember they are $250, way more than i can fork out if not given 5 months!, are those simple ones like the john petty ones still being made?