WANTED: Columbia Grafonola Reproducer

[Hailey]

I am in search of a reproducer for a Columbia Grafonola. I have pictured one type, and the one that I have pictured IS NOT the correct one. The one pictured will not slide into the tone arm and twist into place, as it is too large. I have a couple of the one that is pictured, and neither of them work. So, I am to assume that the "throat" that slips into the tone arm were made in slightly different sizes, although I was never aware of that. Can anyone shed some more light on this...and better yet, help me in my search?

Thanks much.

[De Soto Frank]

Hailey,

Can you post some pictures of:

The Machine

Motorboard / platter / deck

Tone-arm: (whole thing, plus close-ups of sound-box mounting, and the elbow-joint and mounting flange )


These additional details will help us to help you...

[Hailey]

The motor is out for restoration now. I will attempt to photo the tone arm. However, it looks identical to all other Grafonola sound-box mountings where the reproducer is inserted into the flange and then twisted into a "locked" position. Are you aware that there were more than just one standard size on the reproducer neck that fits into the tone-arm where it is then twisted into position? There must be, as the reproducers that I have that are identical to the one that I have pictured, will not fit into the tone arm as they are too big.

Thanks!

[Phonofreak]

Doug, The Columbia Grafonola (Pre-Vivatonal) used the same fitting. It was a bayonet fitting with the spring loaded pin. The Vivatonal fitting was similar to a Victor, or a Victrola. I was able to fit a Columbia Vivatonal reproducer on one of my Victors and Victrola, It will not fit an an Orthophonic machine.
Harvey Kravitz

[De Soto Frank]

In the early to mid 1920's, Columbia re-vamped it's tone-arms and soundboxes. The "new" Columbia soundbox had a flat, "coin-reeded" edge, and a flat bezel secured to the body with four slotted screws.

I don't know if the bayonet-fitting was the same size or not.

I have one of the "new" Columbia reproducers at home; I will try fitting it on the arm of my circa 1914 Columbia "Jewel" table-top machine.

Much Columbia hardware was made from die-cast pot-metal, which is notorious for swelling / cracking / crumbling.


It is not impossible that your parts are suffering from pot-metal disease.


I will check the fit of the later reproducer on the pre-WW-I arm and report back.


Frank

[Hailey]

Thanks, Frank. I have two reproducers like I have pictured, and both are clean examples, and both are way too snug to fit into the arm casting. I just have a sneaky feeling that some of these reproducer backs had slightly smaller diameter necks that would slip in and lock into place correctly. I have one that will do this, but it is very rough and will not fuction in its current state. The entire reproducer is slightly smaller and built differently, yet it still has this slip in and bayonnet locking device that we have spoken of.
I never dreamed that this would become such a challenge for just a darned grafonola reproducer!!

[De Soto Frank]

Welcome to the wacky world that is Grafonola-land !


I just found on my desk here at work, a Grafonola arm and sounbox, the box looks identical to the one in your photo.

The bayonet-"shank" measures ¾ inch in diameter, measured with a carpenter's tape with 1/16" divisions, as well as a ¾" open-end wrench.

[Phonofreak]

I have both the early Grafonola No. 6 reproducers and the New Columbia reproducer. I checked and both fit on my Grafonola. It also fits on my outside horn Graphophones that used this same fitting. Frank is right, there could be some pot metal swelling that makes the fitting too tight. You might have to use sand paper to reduce the swelling.
Harvey Kravitz

[alang]

I have several of these Columbia #6 reproducers and a few of them do fit my Grafonolas, others don't. Definitely pot metal swelling. I also suggest sanding off a little. I do have a Columbia made open horn machine that does not accept any of these, it only accepts a Columbia Concert Grand reproducer. This would suggest that either it is slightly smaller, or it is not made from pot metal and therefore did not swell at all.

Good luck!
Andreas

[Phonofreak]

I think it is pot metal swelling because my New Columbia reproducer fits on my early Grafonolas and later outside horn disk Graphophones.
Harvey Kravitz