The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

This is a Vitaphone Model 100. Following from the needle end of the rosewood rigid tone arm, the sound crosses over an isolated joint under the weight (pot metal). The sound is transmitted to the horizontally mounted diaphragm through a waxed string (polyester string coated in cotton and treated with beeswax) that is looped around a metal screw in the end of the rosewood tone arm. The loop is tensioned by a string (Prolene surgical suture #0 in this case, it is high strength and slippery) that ties to the tone arm with a metal spring at the top (sound insulator), and a larger band spring under the motorboard. Pretty neat, eh? And it sounds lovely, too!

If you unhook the string, it'll play hill&dale records .

Thank you for posting this strange phonograph. I would love to see the Vitaphone in action. Here is a nice summary about its history:
http://www.keithwright.ca/CAPP/Vitaphone/vitaphone.html

The Vitaphone was based in Plainfield, New Jersey, founded by Clinton B. Repp. Despite the rather misleading tenor of the article, the Canadian operation was a subsidiary. Clinton Repp was the same man who had marketed the 1899 Vitaphone - - an entirely different machine. The 1912-1914 incarnation as shown by Micamonster was certainly a creative way of designing a talking machine!

George P.

I assume that there is no relationship between this Vitaphone, and the Vitaphone associated with early sound movies. Curious that the name could be used by two rather different systems, apparently without trade mark conflict or infringement.

Henry wrote:I assume that there is no relationship between this Vitaphone, and the Vitaphone associated with early sound movies. Curious that the name could be used by two rather different systems, apparently without trade mark conflict or infringement.

I suspect Repp's Vitaphone company was long defunct by the late 20's and the copyright may have lapsed- or possibly Western Electric bought it up. I wonder if the Vitanola (a conventional off-brand machine) was influenced by the Repp machine?

I wonder how much tracking pressure that 'tonearm' exerts. Seems like it could be less than a conventional setup, which would be an advantage.

I have a Vitaphone model 60 which has a different weight arrangement on the "tonearm" from the commonly seen large horseshoe clump hanging on the front end of the arm. Mine has the weight hidden under the wood stylus bar. The weight appears to be a flat slab of lead mounted between the two nickeled metal side rails that make up the actual tonearm. The wooden piece is really just a hugely elongated stylus bar. The weight (painted black) is difficult to see, but you can just make it out in the closeup picture of the tonearm. See attached photos.

The tracking force of this design is 160 grams which is just about the same as most of the later acoustic designs such as the Victor orthophonic (#5) and the twin diaphragm Brunswick Ultona (weight slid forward for max. tracking force). Also similar to the early electric horseshoe magnet pickups such as on the Victor RE-45.

The needle sure looks to be at a much more slanted angle to the record than the typical soundbox. Ok so is there a reason why these machines seem to be so much more complex in getting the needle vibrations to the diaphragm vs. a soundbox? Was it just so it could bypass patents held by Victor and others or (?) Doesn't look like it was for saving weight on the needle, given it was 160 grams.

Repp put forth theories that all the objectionable scratching and distortion was filtered out by the wooden bar.