The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

I've just bought a fixer upper Columbia 211 Z, from what I can determine it must be from 1946? I'm going to have to have the sound box rebuilt, the insulation inside the connection is gummy and deteriorated. I wound it enough to see if it would turn, and it seems to, although the brake is a little hesitant to completely stop the turtable, it seems to stutter a bit. I got this at a good price and this model isn't often found in the US, so I'm happy to have it, I just need to figure out now what I'm going to do with it. I've had George Vollema rebuild a Columbia 15 sound box with excellent results, I may send this one off to him, although I'm hesitant about the motor and how much work that will need. I need to take it apart and see what it looks like.

Questions I have are, what is the significance of the "Z" at the end of the model number? If it is indeed from 1946, then why is there a 1952 Columbia 211 H shown at http://www.graham-ophones.co.uk/columbi ... 4578994588

Is the letter suffix more a difference in details, rather than a chronological lettering system?

I also see a hole in the back of the soundbox that I don't know whether it's missing a screw or not.

I realize also this is probably a scaled down model from the Columbia machines I currently own and use, but I sure would like to see it working properly at some point.

Any words of wisdom would be welcomed.

Thank you in advance.

EDIT:

https://youtu.be/CoTK1LcKzVM

This is a test play, it seems to require the same 45-50 turns of the crank to play a single record, just like my Nipponophone Eagle G21 and Columbia 203a. The auto brake isn't working quite right either. I will have to at the very least replace the insulating material inside the connection from the sound box to the tone arm. It has partially perished and isn't sitting at the correct angle.

Was this the one that recently sold on eBay? I was going to bid on it, but I think you went ahead and did the "Buy It Now" which was probably a good decision!

Didn't it come with the original key? That's always nice to get with a machine as sometimes finding the original key can be quite a difficult process

Oceangoer1 wrote:Was this the one that recently sold on eBay? I was going to bid on it, but I think you went ahead and did the "Buy It Now" which was probably a good decision!

Didn't it come with the original key? That's always nice to get with a machine as sometimes finding the original key can be quite a difficult process

Yes, that's probably the one, it was 100 dollars buy it now, and it does have the key. I've never seen one of this model turn up here in the US so I jumped on it.

During WW2, there was a shortage of chromium, so the 211s fittings at that time were sprayed in this dreadfully thin "gold".
It's these that were given the "Z" code.

The hole in the back of the soundbox is standard, but serves no obvious purpose. One problem with these is that the body of the soundbox is made entirely of pot -metal, and can distort slightly so that the pivots of the needle bar don't line up.

The motor is tiny, and apart from the usual lubrication, should need no major work.

Phono48 wrote:During WW2, there was a shortage of chromium, so the 211s fittings at that time were sprayed in this dreadfully thin "gold".
It's these that were given the "Z" code.

The hole in the back of the soundbox is standard, but serves no obvious purpose. One problem with these is that the body of the soundbox is made entirely of pot -metal, and can distort slightly so that the pivots of the needle bar don't line up.

The motor is tiny, and apart from the usual lubrication, should need no major work.

Thank you! Now it makes sense. I haven't opened it up yet to lubricate the motor and governor, right now I'm focusing on getting the sound box to line up and seal. I have no high expectations from this machine but I like it and it was not expensive.

If it is indeed from 1946, then why is there a 1952 Columbia 211 H shown at http://www.graham-ophones.co.uk/columbi ... 4578994588

My understanding of the decoding of the tag is that the "B" before the serial number indicates 1936, and the number under the "B" is the number of years after 1936. Therefore the manufacturing year of your B/10 would be 1936+10=1946, and the one you reference in the link which is marked B/17 would be 1936+17=1953, as noted on that page.

Silvertone wrote: My understanding of the decoding of the tag is that the "B" before the serial number indicates 1936, and the number under the "B" is the number of years after 1936. Therefore the manufacturing year of your B/10 would be 1936+10=1946, and the one you reference in the link which is marked B/17 would be 1936+17=1953, as noted on that page.

The "B" before the serial no. indicates the "class of goods", in this case a gramophone. Different products, i.e. radios, and domestic appliances had different code letters.

Phono48 wrote:

Silvertone wrote: My understanding of the decoding of the tag is that the "B" before the serial number indicates 1936, and the number under the "B" is the number of years after 1936. Therefore the manufacturing year of your B/10 would be 1936+10=1946, and the one you reference in the link which is marked B/17 would be 1936+17=1953, as noted on that page.

The "B" before the serial no. indicates the "class of goods", in this case a gramophone. Different products, i.e. radios, and domestic appliances had different code letters.

If this is indeed pot metal it sure must be a better type than what was used to make the Victor Orthophonic reproducers. I need to see about adjusting the angle of the needle, if that's possible without changing the diaphragm.

I think I'm on my own with the repair of this machine. Here in the US nobody seems to have seen one of these. I opened up the soundbox and the gaskets look pretty dry, but I put it back together and it all seems intact. The needle strikes the record at the wrong angle, and unless I want to send it away to George V. to try and fix, I'm searching for an answer. George says he's never worked on one of these. So, at least I've oiled it and taken it apart. The rubber inside the connection fitting is like thin rubber and I took it out and put it back in, because I don't have anything else to put in its place at this point. Maybe some thin rubber...

Here's another test play. Doesn't sound afwul. It has the tiniest little motor I've ever seen, you were right, Barry!

https://youtu.be/1YARl_f1O4Y

Perhaps the gaskets, since they are dry and hard, have shrunk and this causes the diaphragm to be further back in the body. The needle bar, since it is on pivots, would pivot inward in regard to this shrinkage and would cause the needle to be at the current angle. This could also be the body, being made of pot metal, has swollen. I'm thinking this could be helped by choosing gaskets strategically.

Based on the current gasket size, you could see if any of the new parts available on Ebay would fit. Like the white Exhibition gaskets, the red Victrola No. 2 gaskets, the Orthophonic gaskets, or the Victrola No.4 gaskets.

I attempted to rebuild an American generic reproducer (made of pot metal of course) and ran into the same problem once I replaced the gaskets with the white Exhibition material.

Question. Are there ball bearings? Or just the crappy pivots? (some of the American made generic reproducers have pivot screws, but they just rest against a cylindrical needle bar with no cut out for the pivots to PIVOT in! It's ridiculous!)