The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

Hello, Forum.

This year at Union, I bought a C-250 and an Edisonic reproducer to go with it. I put new gaskets into the original, regular reproducer and oiled the points of motion, and with the Edisonic, I put in new gaskets and transplanted the Bruce stylus and TrueTone diaphragm from a different reproducer, again oiling every point of motion as well.

It would seem to me that the Edisonic should sound far better than the regular reproducer, yet they are indistinguishable, even after much adjustment. I feel like I wasted money on the Edisonic, as I bought it purely so that I would have increased volume and depth of sound, and I am getting neither.

Please tell me that there is something more I can do to get the results I am after. I don't have the spring hooked up on the Bruce stylus for lack of a connection point, but even with the original stylus in place and the spring attached, it didn't change anything.

Yes, here is what to do next: send it to Steve Medved, who can economically and expertly make it sound its best.

I thought about that, as well. I was just curious if there were any further steps I could take at home in the meantime.

I have a normal Edison DD reproducer which was rebuilt by Steve Medved with Bruce stylus and a new diaphragm and an Edisonic that has the original diaphragm and stylus. The volume of the Edisonic is stronger but the quality of sound does not seem to be any better or different to me. I am 77 but I have a pair of new top of the line hearing aids so I do not think the Edisonic is needed other then for use in a very very large room like an auditorium.
I have from time to time had a smile on my face when reading that playing an Edison record on any thing but an Edison machine might cause undue ware to the record grove, due to radial load on the needle, because remember the Edison electric play back machines of the late twenties did not have tone arm feed and the records apparently did not suffer any consequences.
Now there is a sentence that is almost a paragraph in length that would vex my old English prof.
By the way, I like the sound of the reproducer rebuilt by Steve.
Best to all,
Allen

There is not alot of difference in performance in the standard or Edisonic reproducer. The advantage of the Edisonic is that it has a heavier weight to track better on later electrically recorded diamond disc grooves.

I have both an Edison and regular DD reproducers and can't really tell that much difference.

I too will vouch for Steve's excellent work.

Clay

What is heavier than a Baldwin locomotive?

The answer, of course is TWO Baldwin locomotives!

What makes an acoustic reproducer sound louder?
More weight! (and more and more and more.....)

Until we have so much weight that after a record is played
only a few times, the groove has been totally gouged out
by the weight of multiple Baldwin locomotives bearing down.

But hey, for those couple of plays, it sure was loud!

Chuck

Chuck wrote:What is heavier than a Baldwin locomotive?

The answer, of course is TWO Baldwin locomotives!

What makes an acoustic reproducer sound louder?
More weight! (and more and more and more.....)

Until we have so much weight that after a record is played
only a few times, the groove has been totally gouged out
by the weight of multiple Baldwin locomotives bearing down.

But hey, for those couple of plays, it sure was loud!

Chuck

Absolutely correct. That is why I just use my rebuilt (by Steve Medved) Standard Edison reproducer. I rather save my records than have a some limited loud plays. It is nice to have a Edisonic reproducer in the collection.

UPDATE: Larry Hollenberg was kind enough to send me a special TrueTone diaphragm pro bono after reading this thread, fearing that the one I already had may have been unsuited to the Edisonic weight. I am pleased to say that, upon receipt and subsequent installation of this new, thicker TrueTone diaphragm, the Edisonic r eproducer is giving me just the volume/depth boost I was after. Additionally, after the first TrueTone was reinstalled into my standard r eproducer, it too is back to the stellar performance I had remembered.

I know there are a lot of people here who don't like the Edisonic reproducer, but mine sounds miles better than the standard. I admit I much prefer my music loud. Of course my Edisonics were purchased from Ron Dethlefson and were NOS in the box. I haven't worn out any records by using it either. I don't think the Edison Co. would not have designed it to wear out records. This was confirmed by Mr. Dethlefson when asked that question at one of our Golden State Phonograph Society meetings, but I understand why some think that.