Converting an Amberola V to play 2m cylinders

[pughphonos]

Before any purists jump on me, let me make my case. Belt-driven cylinder machines have, as most of you know, "flutter" problems that can't be totally eliminated. I am happy to own an Edison Triumph model D and have sunk much $ into it for cleaning/parts/adjustments--but the flutter remains. A couple months ago I bought an Amberola V with a flywheel at the left end of the mandrel, which plays as smoothly as a disc phonograph--and I LOVE it. I've also figured out how to fit my O reproducer (for 2m and 4m waxes) on it.

Here's what recently came to mind. Wouldn't it be possible to place a 2m feed screw on an Amberola V, install the corresponding half-nut--and, bingo, you'd have a flutter-free, gear-driven 2m cylinder player? WITHOUT having to buy an Amberola 1A?

I know this would be a "permanent" modification (IF possible). But if it is possible I am seriously thinking about buying another Amberola V (to covert to 2m) and selling the Triumph.

I know; I know: this is a "bastardization." I'll just have to pledge to you all and myself that I would never sell said machine until I had "undone" the modification.

Of course, I could be overlooking something here and such a conversion might not be possible. But I thought I would run it by you all to find out, as this group has such an incredible range of experience with antique phonographs.

Ralph

[JerryVan]

Where would you find a 2m feedscrew for an Amberola V? Most Edison machines that I can think of now, use the same feedscrew for both 2m & 4m play, the only difference being the speed of the screw. It's the shifting of drive gears that determine 2m or 4m play, not the screw itself.

I suppose you could have a feedscrew made. It would have to have a pitch that's half the current one. Not impossible if you really wanted to do this.

[VintageTechnologies]

I see no harm in that; go for it!

[Phonofreak]

It sounds like a plan. You'll have the Edison Machine that never was. Good luck with your project. It sounds interesting.
Harvey Kravitz

[gregbogantz]

The problem with changing the feedscrew to feed twice as fast for 2 minute records as it does for 4 minute while rotating at the same speed is that the screw thread would have to be one half the pitch, i.e. a much coarser thread. So you would have to also change the half nut on the reproducer carriage to match this new coarse thread. Neither Edison nor Columbia did their speed change this way. They did it by changing the rotational speed of the feedscrew with different gearing for the two speeds.

[pughphonos]

Thanks, guys. You absolutely rock. I'll freely admit up front that I'm a musician and historian; love to try to make my "windows to the past" (my antique phonographs) as transparent as possible (reproduce as accurately as possible). But with cylinder phonographs that is a hard proposition; it means either buying some pretty expensive machines (the modern specialty ones) or an Amberola 1A (also expensice)--OR making some modifications.

From what you guys have said (and YOU know your mechanics), it sounds easier to try to get a special feed screw made than trying to modify the gearing--or would it? I think of the nifty gear switch mechanism that Edison created in 1926 so that his phonographs could play both the standard Edison discs and the new Long Play records (which required that the travel speed of the reproducer be cut by 2/3rds.

Anyway, thank you all for being accepting of the idea--we'll see what I can manage.

Ralph

[Jerry B.]

The Amberola 1-A is belt drive so you probably wouldn't be happy owning one. Jerry

[JerryVan]

Ralph,

Can you post some photos of the Amberola V feedscrew and its drive gearing? It might suggest some possibilities.

[Jerry B.]

I know a collector that stockpiled Amberola V mechanisms with the intent of building Opera type machines. His logic came from Edison's belief that the V mechanism was superior to the 1-B mechanism and the natural successor. The Edison company didn't follow through with the idea and I hope the collector doesn't either.

Another collector friend had a Triumph that needed a total restoration. Instead of restoring the Triumph deck, he had it nickel plated. A special decorated Triumph was available back in the day so why not do it today? My friend died and the nickel plated Triumph went to his son. His son sold it several years later as a rare nickel plated specially finished Triumph.

So what happens when you go to all the effort to convert your Amberola V into a two minute player? Unless you do something to let future collectors know of the modification it creates confusion. Even then the note could be lost or tossed and the machine becomes a rare "one off" machine made for an eccentric two minute opera artist or some other story.

I don't like things that muddy the water. You have every right to modify your V but it will take a great deal of effort and what do you have when you are finished?

Am I guilt free? Nope! I had a couple of #10 Cygnets that a previous collector had poorly repainted. I stripped the recent paint as well as the remains of the original black. Did I repaint them black? No, I had one wood grained oak and the other in mahogany. I rationalized that wood graining was available then so why not do it now? Was I rationalizing? Yes, but...

Happy collecting, Jerry Blais

[phonogfp]

A man's possessions are his own, to do with as he pleases. If he decides to create a machine that never was, I guess that's his prerogative. But such a course is neither preservation nor collecting. It's a quest for optimal acoustic sound reproduction, lacking historical authenticity.

My opinion is that such a course does no real harm if constructed only of parts. If these parts are not altered from their original state, they can be put back to their original use in the future. No harm done.

However, if a complete machine is altered in a fundamental way (such as changing it to play records it was never meant to play) through the removal of original parts and the substitution of other parts, of if original parts are altered in a non-reversable way, it will make it difficult (or impossible) for someone who values the machine's historical integrity to restore it. Such ill-advised tinkering is the bane of preservationists and collectors.

So my advice is to tinker with parts. But if you don't like what a legitimate complete machine plays, or how well it plays after proper restoration, sell it to someone who appreciates it. Then you can buy parts to assemble a machine of your own design.

George P.