The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

I know what type of studio recorders were used at the Edison phonograph works but what about Columbia? Were the recorders used in the studios the same style as the columbia floating reproducer like the home recorders?

I have been trying to find this out for years, what other companies recorders were like. I have a photo from an old ebay sale. It is not an Edison recorder, at first glance it looked like a vertical recorder however with the way the fulcrum is, it is a lateral recorder sounds waves hit the diaphragm and the stylus would wiggle back in forth instead of up and down. I think on this group there is a photo of a European studio, with Class M phonographs, and they seem equipped with studio recorders similar to a Columbia floating recorder. Seems many studio recorders were variations of the floating one. It is curious there is an Edison Triumph phonograph at Edison with an A case and Class M topworks, but has a mandrel set up for the 1890 talking doll records, but has the later style recorder. Sub companies of the North American Phonograph company used ordinary Standards speakers, and some use Graphophone machines too. Mapleson, used a Bettini recorders. I would love to see U.S. Everlasting, and what did Lambert's studio recorder look like, White,Sterling ect.

Whatever Columbia used for cylinders, it never sounded as fine as Edison's - to my ear, anyway.

Edisone wrote:Whatever Columbia used for cylinders, it never sounded as fine as Edison's - to my ear, anyway.

Perhaps Columbia was not as consistently good as Edison, but I have heard some Columbia band cylinders that were every bit as good. Some of the earliest Columbia disks were better than some of the Victors. I have also heard some great recordings made by the US Everlasting and Indestructible (later Columbia) companies.

All that to say, none of the major companies were consistently the best or worst.

Acoustic recording has all kinds of strange variables that pop up. Humidity, temperature, and atmospheric pressure, (your are recording with a barometer) horn selection, room acoustics, diaphragm selection, material dampening and the list goes on. The same recorder sounds differently on different days. I will say one thing about Columbia Moulded cylinders, they are loud, and had a good bass response, not as much clarity on the top end, as Edison. When choosing what you want in sound, a thin diaphragm usually has more volume, but can be more bassy, while a thicker diaphragm, may have more mid range, and clarity, compromises here and there to get what you want. The sharpness of the recording knife ect.

Charley Hummel, has many recorders used at Columbia. He showed me an attachment, which had two recorders mounted. It seems they also used a trunnion to mount the recorder, on, what I was found interesting is that the recorders attached to this device appeared to be much like the home recorders you find with Graphophones, I am sure though that with very careful gasket and cutting stylus selection the regular recorders can be made to sound very good. I might have to take a trip to his house and document the recording equipment.