HMV v Columbia

[An Balores]

I have long said I am not going to buy any more machines, but my interest was piqued recently by a very nice condition HMV 157 for sale locally. Unfortunately, due to the seller's poor communication skills, it slipped through my fingers. Had I bought it, I would have had to sell my Columbia Viva-tonal 153a cabinet model, with its 'plano-reflex' tone arm and bifurcated horn, to make room. I would be interested to know how the HMV 157 and the Columbia 153a compare, sound-wise. Both models have horns that split in two and then re-join at the mouth, although I suspect the 157 horn is longer and has a bigger mouth. I don't know.

[CarlosV]

I would be interested to know how the HMV 157 and the Columbia 153a compare, sound-wise. Both models have horns that split in two and then re-join at the mouth, although I suspect the 157 horn is longer and has a bigger mouth. I don't know.

That's a tough one. The only objective response would come from someone who owns both and can play them side-by-side. I personally like the Columbia plano-reflex system, its soundbox and bifurcated horn, and I think it is underrated among collectors. The HMV 157 predates the reentrant horns, so my guess is that both would be more or less equivalent in terms of sound.

[OrthoFan]

...The HMV 157 predates the reentrant horns, so my guess is that both would be more or less equivalent in terms of sound.

Hi Carlos:

As far as I know, the HMV 157 was actually listed as part of the new "Re-Entrant" line, even though it's exponential horn is folded in two sections, as opposed to four like the other models. It is equipped with the larger exponential tonearm and #5a sound box. I don't have a copy of the HMV 1927 catalog, but it's listed in the 1928 catalog --

hmv 1928.pdf

(12.31 MiB) Downloaded 49 times

There have been some interesting posts about the HMV 157 on this forum, including:

viewtopic.php?t=7373
viewtopic.php?t=51567&p=313106

The tone chamber is approximately five feet in length, including the tonearm, which means it can reproduce (mid-range) bass notes. While playing a vinyl 45 rpm record on any acoustic phonograph is normally horrific to collectors, this video does do a good job of showing off the overall potential range of the horn -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhNa4uBjhi0

There was an earlier HMV 156 model, which used a case similar or identical to that of the Victor Consolette. That one predated the Re-Entrant line, and was equipped with the swan-neck tonearm and #4 sound box.

[An Balores]

Thank you both. From what I can make out, the HMV 157 horn has a wider conduit and a bigger mouth than the Columbia version. Might be because the tone arm of the HMV is a wider diameter than the Columbia, necessitating a wider horn conduit for it. I'd be surprised if the air column of the Columbia is as much as five feet and so I guess that the HMV would probably have the edge in terms of sound reproduction. But a side-by-side performance comparison would be interesting. The advantage of the Columbia is the slatted door in front of the horn, which provides a volume control - and actually mellows the tone.

[Oedipus]

The Columbia 153(a) and the HMV 157 were not really in direct competition. The 153a cost £14.10s, but the 157 in oak cost £22. The 153(a) was a 'console' model, a fashion at the time, despite the floor-space it needed, and if you look through the open louvres you will see that the actual horn opening is considerably shallower than the height of the louvres. I haven't one to hand to take measurements from but I suspect that its horn is no bigger than that of a large table grand. The cheaper of HMV's two console models in 1927 cost £42, so you can see why so many people chose to impress the Joneses with the Columbia machine at £14.10s!

The 157 was part of the 1928 range, along with the Re-entrant machines. It first went on sale in September 1927, and the 163 and 193 followed in November -- but what's two months between friends? HMV catalogues were careful to apply the term 'Re-entrant' only to the larger models, i.e. those in which the horn divided into four sections. The 157 divides into two, like the Columbia horns, but on a larger scale. The word re-entrant indicates a sudden change of angle, such as you see between adjoining mouth sections in one of these horns, so could have been applied to horns divided in two. It just wasn't. It was, and is, not a term in common use, being largely confined previously to fortifications, so used by military engineers, no doubt. Perhaps that unfamiliarity is why HMV adopted it as a special term, a brand name almost, for their top of the range models.

The two HMV console models of 1927 (£42 and £50) had folded horns, similar to the saxophone horns of the pedestal cabinets, but mounted sideways; the mouth (on the 267, the £50 model) is 11 in. by 15 ½ in. wide. I happen to have one close by a 157, and I can confirm that the 157 runs rings, acoustically, round the 267. My 267 is a late one, and the 157 is an early one, so they both date from 1927, and both models were listed in the same catalogue, though not many 267s could have been sold once the 157 appeared. By November 1928 the price was down to £33 -- still £3 more than a 163!

[OrthoFan]

...The 157 was part of the 1928 range, along with the Re-entrant machines. It first went on sale in September 1927, and the 163 and 193 followed in November -- but what's two months between friends? HMV catalogues were careful to apply the term 'Re-entrant' only to the larger models, i.e. those in which the horn divided into four sections. The 157 divides into two, like the Columbia horns, but on a larger scale. The word re-entrant indicates a sudden change of angle, such as you see between adjoining mouth sections in one of these horns, so could have been applied to horns divided in two. It just wasn't. It was, and is, not a term in common use, being largely confined previously to fortifications, so used by military engineers, no doubt. Perhaps that unfamiliarity is why HMV adopted it as a special term, a brand name almost, for their top of the range models.
...

Many thanks for the excellent explanation of the differences between the models. As you noted, the HMV 157 horn is considerably larger than the Viva-Tonal bifurcated horn used in the console models. I was able to find various photos of the HMV 157's horn online, but so far, I can't locate an image of the Viva-Tonal horn. Here's the 157's horn --

HMV's (four chamber) Re-Entrant style horns, of course, were based on those produced in the United States by its sister company, The Victor Talking Machine Co., which had acquired the rights to use the Western Electric recording process, as well as to produce the exponential horn gramophones--also designed by Western Electric. The Gramophone Co. held off on producing these models for about two years after they were introduced in the US--most likely to use up old cabinet stock. (In the US, the earlier Victrola models were disposed of through a half-price sale to the public a few months before the introduction of the new line, dubbed the Orthophonic Victrola.) When they were finally produced in the UK, the horns were manufactured out of metal instead of wood (gumwood?) as they were in the US.

It's interesting to note that the 157's style metal horn eventually made its way back across the pond, and was installed in the (VV-8-35) follow-on model to the Victor Orthophonic Credenza (8-30), though whether it was larger than the one installed in the 157, I don't know.

While it acquired the right to use Western Electric's recording process, in both the US and UK, the Columbia Phonograph Co. opted not to manufacture the exponential horn gramophones designed by WE. Perhaps Victor--and through Victor, HMV--had acquired exclusive production rights? In any event, Columbia went its own way. In the UK, it produced the Plano-Reflex models, while in the US, Columbia opted for a more conventional approach, installing (wooden) two-chamber horns in the larger cabinet models which in size and shape, emulated those produced by Victor.

OrthoFan

[An Balores]

if you look through the open louvres you will see that the actual horn opening is considerably shallower than the height of the louvres........

That is correct, although you can't see that in mine without removing the louvre assembly as there is a black cloth covering behind the louvres. It does seem a missed opportunity not to have increased the size of the horn mouth to match the opening in the cabinet.
OrthoFan - the only image of the Viva-Tonal horn that I can find is right at the beginning of this video, and again at about 1.23 in (despite the machine being a different model to the 153a Columbia). It is clearly not as big as the 157 horn.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHQM307OiT8

[OrthoFan]

if you look through the open louvres you will see that the actual horn opening is considerably shallower than the height of the louvres........

That is correct, although you can't see that in mine without removing the louvre assembly as there is a black cloth covering behind the louvres. It does seem a missed opportunity not to have increased the size of the horn mouth to match the opening in the cabinet.
OrthoFan - the only image of the Viva-Tonal horn that I can find is right at the beginning of this video, and again at about 1.23 in (despite the machine being a different model to the 153a Columbia). It is clearly not as big as the 157 horn.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHQM307OiT8

I was finally able to find this illustration, albeit grainy, of the two common (UK) Viva-Tonal horns culled from Modern Gramophones by Percy Wilson --

...which is a great reference book, if you haven't read it:

percy-wilson-modern-gramophones-1929.pdf

(7.95 MiB) Downloaded 56 times

OrthoFan

[An Balores]

Interesting! The 'Plano-reflex' horn is very similar to the Rifanco horn number 816, pictured in my post Horns! of Dec 17th last year.