Is it a good idea to play VE records on an acoustic machine?

[ymg200]

My machine (VV-410, #2 reproducer) came with few records - some acoustic and some VE. Most records were pretty worn and I liked the sound from the VE record most. Acoustic records had fair amount of background noise, which I attributed to their condition. I knew that my machine was designed for acoustic records, so I stared looking for acoustic records in good condition. I found few records in VG to EX condition, one record seems like was never played before. To my surprise, however, even the mint acoustic record had produced way more background noise than the VE record that I had. Is it always the case that a VE record has less BG noise than an acoustic record? Did electric recording eliminate the BG noise because the electric signal came from the microphone, meaning no sound -> no signal -> no noise ?
I know that VE records were not designed for acoustic machines, but they sound way better to me than acoustic ones - primarily because of low BG noise. Given my experience, I am inclined to get more VE records for my machine. Does this make sense? I want to make sure that there is no detrimental effect on either the record, or the machine if playing VE on an acoustic machine. Did Orthophonic and #4 apply the same pressure on a record as acoustic reproducers? I don't want to have excessive wear if VE records were designed for less pressure than older reproducers apply.

[startgroove]

Some acoustic machines were specifically made to play electrically recorded records. One of the most famous would be the Victor Credenza and other Orthophonic series, but there are several brands.
In any event, it is best to play your VE's through reproducers which have been properly rebuilt. That way the wear is minimized while sound quality is maximized. If you wish to safely play an electrical recording on a horn phonograph, one way would be to make, or have made, an adapting sleeve.
For comparison, an Exhibition reproducer weights 5 oz 5 gr, a Victrola #2 weighs 5 oz 3 gr and a Victor Orthophonic weighs 5 oz 5 gr.
Cheers, Russie

[audiophile102]

If you enjoy electrically recorded 78 records, you really would be thrilled with the innovation of orthophonic machines. Even low priced Victor orthophonic phonographs will bring out so much more range and fidelity than any acoustic phonograph. Watch Facebook market place in your area and watch out for cracked and broken reproducers. The tone arm brackets are also often broken, but both are easy to replace of you buy the machine at a low enough price point. There is nothing wrong with playing VE records on an acoustic phonograph, but once you hear the difference, you will be amazed. I did a quick search in my area and found this listed. If I were to consider buying, I would negotiate based on condition.
https://www.facebook.com/marketplace/it ... 603554647/

[ymg200]

For comparison, an Exhibition reproducer weights 5 oz 5 gr, a Victrola #2 weighs 5 oz 3 gr and a Victor Orthophonic weighs 5 oz 5 gr.
Cheers, Russie

If the weight of Orthophonic is the same, then the pressures should be the same and there is no harm playing VE records on my machine. Thank you!

[ymg200]

If you enjoy electrically recorded 78 records, you really would be thrilled with the innovation of orthophonic machines.

I do have an Orthophonic machine in my wish list. Unfortunately, most Orthophonic machines are bulky and I don'have much space, so I'm set on the tabletop 1-90, whenever I can find it.

[ymg200]

even the mint acoustic record had produced way more background noise than the VE record that I had. Is it always the case that a VE record has less BG noise than an acoustic record? Did electric recording eliminate the BG noise because the electric signal came from the microphone, meaning no sound -> no signal -> no noise ?

Is it true that electric recording has dramatically reduced the background noise in a record?

[OrthoFan]

For comparison, an Exhibition reproducer weights 5 oz 5 gr, a Victrola #2 weighs 5 oz 3 gr and a Victor Orthophonic weighs 5 oz 5 gr.
Cheers, Russie

If the weight of Orthophonic is the same, then the pressures should be the same and there is no harm playing VE records on my machine. Thank you!

There are other issues besides the weight of the sound box. The Orthophonic diaphragm is more compliant, and a greater area of the diaphragm is moved in and out. This means that there is less resistance to the back and forth movement of the needle's tip. (If you look at a worn record groove through a good quality magnifying glass, you'll see that most of the damage done is to the sides of the groove, and not necessarily the bottom.) In addition, the tracking error is reduced compared to the earlier style tonearms.

OrthoFan

[tesch1932]

[/quote] I do have an Orthophonic machine in my wish list. Unfortunately, most Orthophonic machines are bulky and I don'have much space, so I'm set on the tabletop 1-90, whenever I can find it.[/quote]

Another option would be the VV 2-55. It is a portable Orthophonic phonograph. Much more plentiful than the 1-90, and can usually be found below the $200 price point. Even though it has an all-metal body, the horn is well designed and the portable-style reproducers are more hefty. I have two and they sound amazing. You will be surprised by the base. Weakest point is their support bracket.

I would say they have significantly less background noise, but am not the one to say "how." The expanded frequency response of a VE disc is a night-and-day difference.

[CarlosV]

Is it true that electric recording has dramatically reduced the background noise in a record?

Not really, the background noise is determined by the material utilized to make the recorded surface. Laminated records, that were mostly made by Columbia in the US since the acoustic times, produced very quiet playing surfaces. On the other hand, some of the first Victor electric records were made with materials that had a loud surface noise, actually much noisier than their own previous production of acoustic records. Victor improved its manufacturing later on.

[startgroove]

There are differences in background noise between acoustic vs electrical recordings, the first big difference being caused by the method used to put the signal into the original recording. Most acoustic recordings were made by an etching process which resulted in rough groove walls, compared to electrical recordings which were made by an engraving process using a highly polished jewel chisel which left a much smoother wall.
In addition, the material of the final stampings in electrical recordings were much finer, which further reduced the background noise. There was no need to include any abrasive that would help "wear" the needle into the groove quickly.
One of the VTM company tricks upon removing a stamped acoustic record from the press was to play each recording in order to knock off the highest points in the groove left behind by the roughness of the etching process. That was not necessary for electrical recordings except to test play a few in the run for quality control.