The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

Marco Gilardetti wrote:Should you have the time and the means of scanning the point by point call-and-response between Mackenzie and Wilson, I'd be very glad to read the respective arguments. By the way, that would also be the opportunity to propose the discussion in a specific thread.
-------------------------
As for "From Tin Foil to Stereo" being Edison-oriented, no offense intended to anyone but the United States of America as a whole entity are unbelievably Edison-oriented when seen from afar. I remember expressing my astonishment about this to fellow physicists many years ago, and in reply they explained to me that Edison is (or was) teached in primary school, in a main history chapter, as a sort of national hero, which more or less accounts for the over-reactions of the average American when he perceives that Edison is being criticised by a foreigner.

I decided to split the topic from the original post -- http://forum.talkingmachine.info/viewto ... =2&t=27623

Unfortunately, I don't have a scanner, or even a quality digital camera at this time. The nearest copy shop to me has a "bug up" about scanning books, because of potential copyright violations. A shortened, slightly revised version of the book "From Tinfoil to Stereo: The Acoustic Years of the Recording Industry, 1877-1929" was published several years ago -- https://www.amazon.com/Tinfoil-Stereo-A ... 0813013178 -- so the original source material MAY still be copyrighted.

In any event, the section of the book I quoted from goes into incredible detail, analyzing recording and reproduction methods and building to a central point, so dozens of pages would be involved.

As for the book's Edison bias, that was, to a certain extent, a rebuttal to an earlier book -- "The Fabulous Phonograph" by Roland Gelatt -- which had appeared about five years earlier and was critical of Thomas Edison, especially his management of the phonograph. Welch and Read, though they do not name the book specifically, refer to it as a "fictitious history of the phonograph published a few years ago." I think "From Tin Foil to Stereo" was the authors' attempt to "set the record straight.

The actual Edison bias in "From Tin Foil to Stereo" has more to do with recording technology and innovations brought about by Edison's company, especially the Edison Diamond Disc Phonograph, in comparison to other methods -- for instance, the Diamond Disc Phonograph's use of a precision ground diamond stylus; an airtight tone chamber; a feed screw to propel the tonearm across the record, etc. (Most importantly, the authors build a case that Edison's vertical (hill and dale) recording method was vastly superior to the lateral recording method used by almost all other companies.)


The authors also argue that Edison's "dead" recording studio method was superior, since it did not impose the acoustical qualities of one room (the recording studio) onto another (the listening room). In one very interesting chapter, the authors compare the Diamond Disc Phonograph with the Orthophonic Victrola, examining the function and technology of each component. The Diamond Disc phonograph is the winner, in their view.


The book is quite an interesting read--although it runs 550 pages (in small type, double columns) including the index. I highly recommend you try to hunt down a copy--either the 1959 or 1976 edition.

OF

I believe that scanning or quoting a reasonably small portion of a (even fresh of print) book is always allowed if done for review purposes, which is clearly what we had in mind to do with this topic. However, as you don't have a scanner at hand, please nevermind.

Indeed Edison's management of the phonograph is easy to criticise under many aspects, although it has also been at the same time a history of an undeniable commercial success. I suppose that many people, myself included, is preminently bewildered by the stubborn and shortsighted way in which Edison managed a device of which he held key patents, commercial success aside. At least under some aspects, sometimes it seems that the phonograph had succes despite Edison's decisions.

The Diamond Record is unfortunately a technology about which I can't comment, as it never did it to Italy. I have yet to see a diamond record player "live". By the way I wonder if it had any relevant sales in UK or perhaps Germany, as these machines seem to be so scarce all over Europe as if they had never been marketed there. All I can say is that the tangential movement of the arm was brilliant (but it was not invented by Edison) and that the thickness of the records is a technical nonsense.

2009 was the semi-centennial anniversary of From Tinfoil To Stereo. A friend wrote a retrospective on the book which appeared in an issue of The Sound Box (now The Antique Phonograph), which I expanded upon in the following issue. For anyone interested, that article can be downloaded here:
There's no doubt that From Tinfoil To Stereo contains lots of information - and much of it is accurate. However, as the article referenced above illustrates, there are many inaccuracies waiting for the unwary. I was one of the unwary innocents who initially believed everything I read there until experience and critical thinking forced me to reconsider. As I've written here before, I can forgive errors of omission or the result of incomplete data. (I hope others will be as forgiving of me! ) But spinning "facts" out of thin air, and slavishly elevating Edison (the man) to deified status while simultaneously excoriating others who competed with the deity is beyond the pale. I believe Read & Welch were guilty of this. Still, as I mentioned at the outset, the book has value for those who can wade through the rhetoric and inaccuracies.

George P.

So, "The Fabulous Phonograph" and "From Tinfoil to Stereo" each contain information which disagrees with the other, and each contain information which is correct. There are not many other books that are as comprehensive as these two are, and yet in the absence of proof as to what is correct, it makes me mistrust a little, what I read in any book about Edison or the phonograph.

Related to that, there are numerous books about Tesla, some of them point out the bad temperament of Edison from Tesla's point of view and some alleged "underhanded" activities of Edison.

Yet, in my mind Edison was a creative genius (who didn't need a high level education to succeed at what he loved to do). He simply was not the only genius in his field, or at that time.

Dear George, although I am by no means an Edison detractor, I truly appreciate your balanced criticism about how his work and figure had been foolishly inflated by some authors, with an attitude that recalls nationalism under at least some aspects.

The reason why I first challanged this topic - many years ago - with fellows physicists and engineers, is that whoever understands the basic physical principles of his "current war" against Tesla, knows that Edison was perhaps an ingenuous man under many aspects, but definitely not a "deity", to use your words.

It really was too bad that Read and Welch went to the ramparts in their defense of Edison. They did a good service to collectors at the time, because there was very little material available about the Edison phonograph companies. But they unfortunately viewed The Fabulous Phonograph as an attack of the work of Edison. It isn't really, and in fact some of Roland Gellatt's chapters on Edison are sympathetic and quite charmingly written.
But I always chuckle when I read From Tinfoil to Stereo's description of the final days of phonograph and record production at Thomas A Edison Inc. They endow Charles Edison with a sort of superhuman ability to predict the future: the decision to discontinue production is shown as selfless nobility in the face of the economic maelstrom unleashed by the stock market crash...jobs saved....workers happy...etc etc. The only thing was that the decision to discontinue production had in been gestating months before the stock market melt down. The decision to cease production was made well before October 29th, 1929.

Jim

I started collecting about 1972 and I remember being so excited to finally own my own copy of Tinfoil to Stereo. I read every word and initially believed the content. It's still a book worth owning but it is full of errors and bias. I was strongly influenced by first generation collectors. Many first generation collectors believed:

The only cylinder machine worth owning was an Edison.

The only disc machine worth owning was a Victor.

The only reason for buying a Victrola was for the parts.

Columbia cylinder machine should be avoided because there was so much pot metal.

Columbia disc machine should be avoided because the mechanism was inferior to a Victor.

Portable disc machines were good for target practice.

I think it's important to remember that first generation collectors struggled to find replacement parts. Locating something as simple as an H reproducer was really difficult. The first replacement Victor rear mount elbows were fashioned from plumbing parts. We were really happy when the (now crappy) aluminum elbows were available!

Even though I've collected 40+ years I consider myself a second generation collector. I initially avoided Columbia cylinder machines as well as Victrolas. But soon I realized that Graphophone cabinets were so darn attractive and, if you were selective, pot metal machines could be avoided or purchased with caution. Also, it wasn't long before I fell in love with unusual Victrolas. To this day I still carry baggage in the form of bias. I don't have any portable suitcase style disc machines in my collection. I have appreciated seeing portable machines at the shows and am quick to admit they put out a ton of good sound from a small package.

Jerry Blais

Marco Gilardetti wrote:Dear George, although I am by no means an Edison detractor, I truly appreciate your balanced criticism about how his work and figure had been foolishly inflated by some authors, with an attitude that recalls nationalism under at least some aspects.

The reason why I first challanged this topic - many years ago - with fellows physicists and engineers, is that whoever understands the basic physical principles of his "current war" against Tesla, knows that Edison was perhaps an ingenuous man under many aspects, but definitely not a "deity", to use your words.

I don't consider myself an Edison detractor either. I admire him for the genius he was - warts and all. Others seem to be "all or nothing" in their veneration. The man eventually walks on water and gives sight to the blind. For me, it's far more meaningful to appreciate what someone accomplishes, despite their (sometimes glaring) imperfections.

George P.

That bias extends throughout the whole phonograph collecting hobby. I always see comparisons between Diamond Disc machines and Orthophonic, but there were four big players, not just two. In my opinion, the Brunswick Cortez is the best sounding machine I've ever heard, and Columbia Viva Tonals were the best sounding recordings. Victor had the best performing artists, and Edison had the most interesting machines from a mechanical standpoint.

Indeed: perhaps the current Zeitgeist has sharpened everyone's sense of division.

Each side in the argument has their strengths, and their flaws: we could do with a new synthesis, to see history more clearly.

Bill