Pal Supreme Portable

[larryh]

Hello all;

Was out antiquing and ran across this Pal Portable. The real label I see after getting it home says Supreme which evidently is the model. It is in rough but I think savable shape. One thing I wasn't sure about was the fact that the tone arm wasn't in the pivot and loose in the case. The reproducer was off the arm as well and is pot metal. I see that the arm will fit rather well in the pivot point and it seems even with out oil to move rather freely compared to some troublesome portables. I put the reproducer on the arm and cranked it up, found a 78 in the shop and to my surprise it really didn't sound too bad even with a needle of dubious use.

So what is it? Does that arm just sit in the pivot or is it supposed to be glued in in some way, its rather open around it in places and that would tend to effect the sound I would guess. It has a wood deck which is nice. The outside is mostly in fairly good shape with the usual loose fabric on the one side of corners which I am sure I can fix. It has a whitish film on most of the lower side and I think its mildew. Haven't done anything but take these before photos at this point. The motor ran pretty good too but the crank is making odd noises when you turn it. The old rubber in the reproducer is in poor shape and probably could be replaced or something one with it. But I have no knowledge of the availability of anything like that.

All and all its interesting. I may restore it as closely as I can to good shape and may move it on in time, but it depends on how it sounds I think. I don't think the pot metal reproducer could come apart without major problems, so am hopeful a new needle and good period record will bring the sound to a near perfect point.

Larry

[larryh]

This thing is more of a time consumer than I expected. First I had trouble getting the motor board out the way it was installed. Always easy in hind site of course. I oiled and greased the motor which runs very quiet. That is at least one plus for it. The wood cleans up only so far and has scratches that will show unless I do something more drastic to it than cleaning and waxing which I have done. The outside of the case is really a problem in that a large patch of the top is white and the finish is gone. I have run into this in other leatherette cases. I think I will attempt a thinned down paint job of some kind and see what happens, won't be out too much if its a failure I don't think. I have tried to liquid shoe polish that was suggested here a while back. That left it still rather blotchy looking on my orthophonic portable.

The biggest issue and one that may not be fixable is the reproducer. While it sounded pretty fair just stuck on the arm at the shop. When I tried to tighten the set screw to hold it one the arm all I accomplished was the pot metal coming apart and the threaded piece lifting away from the reproducer. I can only guess what might occur should I try to take the old out of shape and loose fitting hard rubber out of the rear. I think it would fall to pieces probably? I may have to look for another reproducer. Its a Dynamic #11 UPCO corporation NY. Doesn't exactly look to me like it was the original but so far I can't find the same machine to check it by. I am attempting to glue the little broken off part back on the reproducer but won't know till tomorrow if it will work. I sort of doubt it.

Larry

[larryh]

Does anyone here have a link to a machine like this so I can see what the reproducer looks like. I still don't think this one is the original. Not sure if this is an acoustic or electrical era machine? I know the wood interiors seem to be in the orthophonic period more than the earlier one? I did manage to get the rubber out of the back but the glue I used on the loose screw part came loose due to the W D40 I used to help make it soften up a bit. I am gluing it with some metal epoxy this time I think will withstand more pressure and cleaners.

Larry

[larryh]

I guess I will have to provide a finished photo later here. I just wanted to mention something that may be common knowledge but was a new thought to me. I had that bushing that was melted and left the reproducer dangling at an angle on the end of the arm. I was able to take a utility knife and scrape away at the hardened out of shape rubber and get it to come out without the thing falling apart any worse to my surprise. I went to the local farm supply store with the end of the tonearm and the reproducer hoping to find some rubber tubing that would take the place of the bushing enough to make it play at least for a while. I couldn't get anything to work.. I ask some people but no one had a decent idea. I then thought of some rubber washers that were thick they had. I could have bought four of them and cut them to fit, but I knew it would be ragged at best. They I noticed the rubber O rings.. they had some ⅛ inch thick ones and one size slid over the tonearm nicely.. So I put four on and then to my surprise it all slid snugly in the reproducer and held it very firmly and in place without a tendency to want to twist out of place. I did re glue the set screw part with metal epoxy and it seems to be holding but he screw threads are not very good any longer.. I could probably get in in place and then side a couple O rings in to fill the rest of the space, but I as nicely as it holds I don't think it will tend to work it self out of position very easily.

Just thought in case someone needed an emergency new bushing that you might try o rings if you hadn't thought of it.

Oh and since the case looked like it was bleached white on the bottom and half the top and coming all apart from the wood, I glued it down with a long kitchen knife and tacky glue. Then I painted it with a coat of gloss latex black paint. It actually looks pretty good and is a whole lot better than the shoe polish idea I tired. Some time I am going to attempt to de wax the orthophonic case and do the same as its rather splotchy too, but not nearly as bad.

Larry

[larryh]

The reproducer is not in great shape. It is also not the original I am pretty sure since it does not allow the arm to rest level on the record. I held up my Telefunken reproducer to the arm to see how it might sound and the quality of tone was pretty fair. I put the reproducer back on the Telefunken which is a much thinner type cabinet and the sound was noticeably shallower sounding although very clear. That at least gives me encouragement that if it had a decent reproducer of the correct size for it that it might be a reasonably good machine. The telefunken has a feature where it had a bushing and inside the bushing is another short metal piece which rides inside the arm of the phonograph instead of over it like many. If the inside piece were removed I think it would fit, but I don't want to ruin the bushing that is in it trying to remove that stub piece. Now to find a decent reproducer?

[frenchmarky]

<<The reproducer is not in great shape. It is also not the original I am pretty sure since it does not allow the arm to rest level on the record.>>

I didn't know tonearms had to specifically be level with the record (?) Or do you mean something else, like the reproducer+needle does not sit perpendicular to the record but is at a slight sideways angle because it is so large it is pivoted up at too high an angle? Am I correct that the joint there, between the reproducer and the base of the tonearm, is where the soundbox pivots at? Weird, I've only seen soundboxes that stay perpendicular to the platter while they pivot, not one that rotates in an arc like this (if what I think I'm seeing is correct.)

[larryh]

I guess what I mean is that with the reproducer on the arm the arm causes the reproducer to tilt inwards due to the center of each being different. The reproducers center is a bit higher causing the tilt. The Telefunken reproducer is the correct size around and the arm rest level with the record.

By level I mean the portion of the arm that pivots is level with that center opening in the reproducer.. This should make sense I hope. One other problem is the arm is not fastened into the rear pivot point and can be pulled loose easily. I put a piece of electrical tape around it to cause it to hold better. If I get the correct size reproducer that works well I will probably glue the arm in place, although I see no sign that it was every permanently mounted in the rear pivot.

[estott]

What you're trying to say is that a larger diameter reproducer lifts the arm higher which tilts the needle away from vertical. I've seen this even on unaltered machines- some manufacturers were sloppy. I can only explain it by believing that portables were primarily used for playing popular records and listeners would get tired of the selections before they wore out.

That Pal Supreme is nice, Plaza Music Co. sold many machines under the PAL and REGAL names, most are well constructed but plain.

[gramophoneshane]

I think your soundbox is correct for the machine.
Pal used components manufactured by Thorens, and the soundbox appears to be by Thorens too.
Judging by your speed control, the motor is one of Thorens better double springs motors the same as was used in Rexonolas Prismaphonic portables, table & cabinet models. I think(?) these motors were first introduced to the Rexonola line in mid 1928, so I would assume your machine would date from after that time as well.
Only one of my Pal portables came with a soundbox, but unfortunately the mask is missing, so I cant compare it with yours, but I'm guessing yours looks the same beneath the mask.
Your needle bar pivots look a little different from what I can see. Mine are the same as Thorens had been using since before WWI, so your soundbox must be a later "improved" version of my soundbox.
I noticed the position of your crank in it's clip in your photos. I'm not sure if you know already, but the clip is actual designed to hold the knob rather than the metal rod.

[larryh]

Shane

This reproducer is made by UPCO products N. Y. I don't think its the original. Too far of in the way it rides the records. I tired to position the handle in some what but it won't fit with the wood part in the clip? Besides there is the hole there that just about only the crank would seem to go into? The fact that the tone arm, at least the one with it, was not fashioned in place in the pivot makes me wonder if its even the right one? I read somewhere that the pal arms were re moveable on some models. It does have the double spring Thorens spring motor which is good. I don't like the lid lift much as it has a wide metal plate on both sides and the only thing that holds it up is a very easy to dislodge little clip kind of thing with a handle on it. It may be made to open all the way and rest on it as well as the hole that is in it. If its in the lower position it seems to be almost too low for my taste.
It might be that crank fits the larger of the two clips, but since the reproducer seems to fit it I thought that is probably how it went, but heck, who knows. I would love to still find an original ad or shot of this machine.

I put up a photo showing the case after I glued the bottom corners that were all loose and the fabric which was as well. It went pretty well. Then since the black was gone from most of this lower side and a good deal of the lid I decided to try the latex gloss black paint. It is a hair shiny, but a whole lot better than what it was.

Thanks for the replies I was starting to wonder if no one knew anything about them.

Larry