The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

I have a later Panatrope suitcase model identical to the one shown in this YouTube video (though mine isn't in quite such factory-new condition).

(Double-click the video above or click this link to go to the video on YouTube.)

If you don't think suitcase phonographs are interesting, one of these Panatropes may just change your mind. They are incredible little sound producers. Though I haven't done anything to my reproducer, it has a full, satisfying sound: tons of volume (considerably more than my Victor VV 2-55), big smooth bass sound (very strong but not booming), and FAR more treble than the VV 2-55. The Brunswick produces subtle, detailed performances with soft-tone needles (even on acoustic records), where my much less responsive Victor soundbox would whisper.

I read that the horn is solid-cast, like that of the UK Columbia 202, which must account for part of the sonic richness. The diaphragm looks larger than that of an Orthophonic. Apparently one advance in these Panatropes is that they were engineered with almost perfect tracking: surely the motivation for their acrobatically twisting tonearm design.

It really is a magnificent sounding little machine, and handsome too. Mine has gold plating on all the exposed metal parts. Though I've seen photos of other specimens online where the metal parts are painted a dull metallic gold, as on the VV 2-55 only less attractively.

Much as I love my suitcase Panatrope, I don't know much about it.

For instance:

1. Does anyone know the model number? It doesn't have one of those round gold tags with the model number like some other Brunswick machines have.

2. I've seen the production date of 1926 given for this model on the internet. Is that accurate?

3. Is there any information available the how to rebuild this particular soundbox? Or are there professionals who rebuild Panatrope soundboxes?

4. Does anyone make new diaphragm gaskets for these? Or tonearm gaskets? (Note: I'm assuming there must once have been a rubber gasket sealing the connection of the soundbox to the tonearm, as the soundbox [bayonet-mounted] won't stay on without several wrappings of teflon tape. There's a set screw in the end of the tonearm that must have held the missing gasket in place.]

From what I've read on other threads here, these suitcase Panatropes are something of a well-kept secret, fiercely loved by the few who know them (and bought them, as a rule, for thruppence). Many people sing the virtues of the VV 2-55, but mine has been seriously outgunned, and out of work, ever since that mousey gray Panatrope moved in!

Very nice sound; gotta get me one o' them thar Panatropes!

Here's the scoop on the recording: http://adp.library.ucsb.edu/index.php/m ... 829-Sunday

Some pretty big names in there: Bix, TD, Lang, Venuti, et al., and my favorite name of all the '20s guys: Howdy Quicksell on banjo. With a name like that, he should have been a used-car salesman!

P.S. Forgot to mention Bill Rank, a very underrated trombonist of the era, known (at least by me) for his eccentric solo style (big leaps, wide intervals). From the sound, I'd bet that it's TD who solos on "Sunday," though.

You have a Brunswick 109, which the November 1929 Music Trade Review said was "just put on the market", but I am finding ads for it from July 1929.

I used patent drawings to determine how to open the reproducer. I removed the back, leaving the diaphragm and everything else in place. The only adjustments I found necessary consisted of adding a bit of penetrating oil to the bearings and flattening the gasket-holding edge of the backplate by lightly sanding on a piece of Garnet paper stuck to glass. It was warped just enough to cause air leaks & weak bass notes. The diaphragm gaskets are very thin & I don't think they were ever soft - the diaphragm is meant to be held firmly at the edge. I did seal the repro to the arm just a bit, with heavy grease.

Warning: The reproducer is pot-metal, and I broke a piece off the 'neck' of mine when I twisted it a bit too hard onto the tonearm. Ack!

*Henry, that DAHR database looks like a great resource.

*Edisone, thank you for the treasure trove of data and info (and not least for identifying the model number of my Panatrope). The information about your soundbox renovation couldn't be more appreciated! I think my gaskets must be sound, because the reproducer is airtight when I blow gently into the neck. I'll look for some penetrating oil and drip it into the needlebar bearings.

I've sealed the tonearm/reproducer joint with a few turns of teflon tape, because the connection needed tightening, and I've greased the joint in the tonearm itself and the connection of the tonearm to the motorboard. Without lifting the motorboard, it looked as though there might be another sealable joint at the beginning of the horn just below the motorboard; a heavy application of grease there, in fact, appears to have brought about another increase in volume.

One surprising effect of this machine is that it has made listening to badly worn electric records very hard. My VV 2-55 kind of skates over the dodgy treble of a beat-up record (pouring out tons of bass in compensation), while the more sensitive Panatrope really seems to bring out the flaws of a tired and worn out disk--you can FEEL the lack of integrity in the upper registers. But the old 109 makes good records sound like the bee's knees.

Meltrope3 wrote:*Henry, that DAHR database looks like a great resource.

It is that, although it's not totally complete. But it does contain a heck of a lot of information!

Victor sure produced a lot of recordings!

Henry wrote:

Meltrope3 wrote:*Henry, that DAHR database looks like a great resource.

It is that, although it's not totally complete. But it does contain a heck of a lot of information!

Victor sure produced a lot of recordings!

It is Victor heavy, as it started off as the Encyclopedic Discography of Victor Recordings, but that will likely change in time. It is a fabulous resource.

Clay