The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

Hi All,
Maybe someone on here can give me an answer to this question. What is the difference between a victor # 2 Reproducer and A Victor Exhibition Reproducer? Does one produce a better sound than the other? Are they Interchangeable? I just bought a machine VV-IV from eBay and chances are it will need a reproducer. Also are springs and or motors available for these. Thank you in advance, and stay safe.
Bob

Hi Bob,

Both the Victor Exhibition and the Victrola No.2 sound boxes sound very good when rebuilt and properly adjusted. As to which sounds better is largely a matter of opinion. Since the Exhibition was introduced in late 1901/1902 and the Victrola No.2 was appeared in 1917, one might assume that the company believed the No. 2 to be an improvement - especially since it replaced the Exhibition on all but the lowest-priced models.

Yes, these two sound boxes are interchangeable. Since either can be obtained very reasonably, you could have one of each.

The VV-IV is a common machine, so spare parts are readily available. If you need a mainspring, they are offered by a number of good repairmen. I get mine from Ron Sitko, but his shop is closed every year from Thanksgiving to New Year's. His contact information is in the "Links" section under "Repairs, Parts, Dealers, Sales, and Auctions."

The VV-IV was manufactured for many years in a number of variations, so if you need parts other than a sound box, be sure to let the supplier know the serial number stamped into the machine's data plate.

Best of luck,
George P.

Although I have no proof, I have a theory that changes in reproducer design may have reflected changes in the recording process. Perhaps record label design changes reflected that as well, it certainly did in the case of Orthophonic recordings.

Congratulations on buying your machine! Properly maintained, it should give you long and enjoyable service. As to the reproducer, if it were mine, I'd be inclined to go with an Exhibition. It's smaller than the No. 2, and therefore probably a little lighter (others can correct me if I'm wrong; I don't have a No. 2 to compare to my own Exhibition). Given that the VV IV has only a single-spring motor, that lesser weight might give you a little more play time on a winding. It won't be a huge difference, but it might be the difference between a 10" and a 12" before rewinding and only two 10" records, something on that order.

Here's some information about (some of) the various types of Victor sound boxes:

http://www.victor-victrola.com/Soundboxes.htm

...And some more technical information about performance differences -- http://www.victor-victrola.com/Soundbox%20Article.htm

I agree with DRH that an Exhibition sound box would be more appropriate for a smaller horn table model. The No. 2 sound box, which has a larger diaphragm than the Exhibition sound box, is also "brighter" sounding as well as louder, and some records played on a smaller horn model may come out sounding harsh, especially when a loud tone needle is used.

OrthoFan
(PNG)

I think the main difference between an Exhibition and No 2 is the compliance, with the No 2 being the lowest. The No 2 has springs which are about twice as long as those on the Exhibition, which helps increase compliance. Also, the No 2 has a larger diaphragm which not only helps to increase compliance, but also reduces dampening of the lower frequencies. In addition, the armature on a No 2 has less mass than an Exhibition armature has, which theoretically should increase the higher frequency reproduction. There are other little differences which lend to the superior reproduction capabilities of a No 2. Cheers, Russie

Victor introduced the No 2 at about the same time they changed the tonearm configuration. I will never be able to prove it, and I doubt any documentation exists to back this idea up, but I am firmly convinced that the No 2 was intended for the revised tonearm design.

Victor tonearms were long and slender, with the Exhibition soundbox resting on the center of the tapering tube when the gooseneck is cocked back; the No 2 is usually fitted to a shorter, wider tonearm that is fitted with a little shelf on which the soundbox rests when the gooseneck is cocked back. The gooseneck is also slightly truncated where the soundbox fits on those arms, compared with the older style.

But, as mentioned earlier, both are interchangeable on any Victor tonearm. I always preferred the sound of the Exhibition, but each has its merits and adherents.

Although I have an Exhibition sitting here in perfect condition, I use a No. 2 on my VV-XVII and I think it sounds great. I only play acoustic records on this instrument; I have an 8-30X credenda to play the later electrically recorded discs. (I also have a beautiful No. 4 here; I don't know why I don't use it more on the XVII.)

Peace to all!

For what it's worth, I just weighed an Exhibition, a #2 and a brass #4. The Exhibition weighs 151 grams, the #2 weighs 148, and the #4 weighs 147 grams.

Jim

shoshani wrote:Victor introduced the No 2 at about the same time they changed the tonearm configuration. I will never be able to prove it, and I doubt any documentation exists to back this idea up, but I am firmly convinced that the No 2 was intended for the revised tonearm design.

Victor tonearms were long and slender, with the Exhibition soundbox resting on the center of the tapering tube when the gooseneck is cocked back; the No 2 is usually fitted to a shorter, wider tonearm that is fitted with a little shelf on which the soundbox rests when the gooseneck is cocked back. The gooseneck is also slightly truncated where the soundbox fits on those arms, compared with the older style.

But, as mentioned earlier, both are interchangeable on any Victor tonearm. I always preferred the sound of the Exhibition, but each has its merits and adherents.

I have an original Exhibition on my VV-IX with narrow tone arm; it sits on a rest to one side.

- Bill