Edisonic vs. Orthophonic shootout

[drh]

Toward the end of last year, the pieces fell into place for me to do something I'd contemplated for probably a couple of decades: a comparative playback shootout between the Victor Orthophonic Credenza and the Edisonic Schubert, each playing the exact same recording in the machine's native format. I did the deed, and the results are now published on the English-language side of TNT-Audio, the little "audiophile" webzine that has adopted me as its antique audio mascot. If you've ever wondered how Edison's and Victor's implementations of electric recording playback stacked up against each other in direct comparison, this is as close as I can get us to an answer. Here's a link to the article, which goes into some detail about the records, the machines, and the method by which I recorded them; my youtube video of the machines playing the same recording, one in diamond disc form and the other as an Edison lateral, is embedded at the end.

https://www.tnt-audio.com/vintage/ediso ... nic_e.html

Several forum members played a part in realizing this long-held dream: George Stoffer sold me the Edison lateral, Ken Danckaert has kept the machines' mechanicals happy and healthy, and Wyatt Markus made the reproducers sing. (For much of the rest, it was eBay to the rescue.) Thanks to one and all! (I should add that any blunders in the article are mine and mine alone. )

[recordmaker]

Very well presented thank you.
Both would be good listening for the average owner at the time but it was very unlikely that Edison was going to make electrical cuts to outstrip Victor. The Edison lateral sounds nice on the Victor Machine which by then had more money and science spent on it. The Edison main investment had been 15 years earlier.

You state that in this one the microphone feed made simultaneous cuts on the lateral and diamond disc master blanks.

I would need to look this up I thought I read that the lateral recordings/sessions were outsourced and some of the late diamond discs dubbed from the lateral record?

[drh]

Very well presented thank you.
Both would be good listening for the average owner at the time but it was very unlikely that Edison was going to make electrical cuts to outstrip Victor. The Edison lateral sounds nice on the Victor Machine which by then had more money and science spent on it. The Edison main investment had been 15 years earlier.

You state that in this one the microphone feed made simultaneous cuts on the lateral and diamond disc master blanks.

I would need to look this up I thought I read that the lateral recordings/sessions were outsourced and some of the late diamond discs dubbed from the lateral record?

Thanks for the kind words. I got the bit about split feed from the Copeland and Sherman Collector's Guide to Edison Records, which states that on p. 29. I've never heard anything about outsourcing for dubbing--but that doesn't mean it didn't happen! What did get dubbed was Blue Amberol cylinders after the factory fire; from that point on, most if not all were dubbed from Diamond Disc masters.

[coyote]

To my knowledge, no Diamond Discs were dubbed from vertical recordings. However, after a certain point, almost all (if not all) Blue Amberol CYLINDERS were dubbed from Diamond Discs.

In my anecdotal observations, the take letters of the vertical Diamond Disc and the lateral needle-type are not necessarily the same take. That is, take "B" on Diamond Disc is not necessarily the same take as "B" on the needle-cut.

Apologies, drh. I was posting my reply at the same time as yours.

[recordmaker]

on page 88 of The Edison Disc Phonograph . G Frow ( 1982 ), states that "from August 15th 1929 there would be no more direct mastering of diamond discs only needle cuts. in the New York studios unless instructed from West Orange".

Since production ended only 8 weeks later it does not leave a lot of time for the production of any lateral to vertical Diamond Disc dubs.
There is also a suggestion that a very few late blue amberols were dubbed from the laterals by R.Dethlefson.

[drh]

on page 88 of The Edison Disc Phonograph . G Frow ( 1982 ), states that "from August 15th 1929 there would be no more direct mastering of diamond discs only needle cuts. in the New York studios unless instructed from West Orange".

Since production ended only 8 weeks later it does not leave a lot of time for the production of any lateral to vertical Diamond Disc dubs.
There is also a suggestion that a very few late blue amberols were dubbed from the laterals by R.Dethlefson.

Probably not an issue here, considering that the Roth recording was made in October 1928, but interesting nonetheless. Thanks for digging up the info!

...In my anecdotal observations, the take letters of the vertical Diamond Disc and the lateral needle-type are not necessarily the same take. That is, take "B" on Diamond Disc is not necessarily the same take as "B" on the needle-cut.

Apologies, drh. I was posting my reply at the same time as yours.

No problem--letters that cross in the mail, and all that. I've given the two records a simultaneous play test, and they are pretty certainly the same take--they stick together very closely once synched up. Human players aren't robots (modern drum machines are a different matter!), and even the most consistent of them will drift apart quickly in differing takes, at least in my experience. To be honest, I'd be surprised if more than one take of these records ever got issued; they were on the market for a matter of only a few months, and even leaving aside Edison's disastrous loss of market, I don't imagine the literature was such as to generate the sort of high demand that would call for replacing worn-out masters from one take with those from another, as had been the company's practice in its salad days.

[Edit] For whatever it's worth, I also looked the recording up in DAHR. It shows take B as the only one issued on diamond disc, and it states the following: "Recorded simultaneously as lateral 'Needle Type' master N-539." DAHR further indicates that only the one take of the lateral master was issued but that test pressings of two others are preserved at the Edison historical site.

[Homestead]

Being an Edison man myself, I hate to admit it, but all things equal, the Orthophonic Credenza won hands down to my ears. This sound was richer and fuller, while the Edison was "tinnier", thinner and more high end surface noise. Sorry Mr. Edison, but you had passed your prime by this time.

[audiophile102]

Thank you for going to all the trouble of making the video. My victrola 8-12 sounds better than my Edison A250, but it's like comparing apples and oranges. Both are outstanding and fun to own. I wish I owned a Beethoven and a Credenza, but four phonographs is enough for my house.

[VanEpsFan1914]

I do hate to sound ignorant but would it be a better demonstration of the machines' capability if the lids were closed and the camera and microphone placed a few feet back? In my living room I have a Victor III, Brunswick Panatrope console, and Edison A-200. They all get used (except the Victor talking machine which is no longer winding up. I must have it fixed.) The Victor sounds best with the horn pointing in some directions, the Panatrope is best with the doors half open and the lid closed, and the A-200 has no mute-ball anymore so I play it with the lid closed.

Horn phonographs are highly dependent on rooms to sound good.

That aside I very much enjoyed the Haydn selection, the Roth String Quartet's rendition, and the two excellent antique phonographs being used here. This is as scientific a test as we can hope for in the 21st century. Thank you for doing this and writing that excellent article.

[drh]

I do hate to sound ignorant but would it be a better demonstration of the machines' capability if the lids were closed and the camera and microphone placed a few feet back? In my living room I have a Victor III, Brunswick Panatrope console, and Edison A-200. They all get used (except the Victor talking machine which is no longer winding up. I must have it fixed.) The Victor sounds best with the horn pointing in some directions, the Panatrope is best with the doors half open and the lid closed, and the A-200 has no mute-ball anymore so I play it with the lid closed.

Horn phonographs are highly dependent on rooms to sound good.

That aside I very much enjoyed the Haydn selection, the Roth String Quartet's rendition, and the two excellent antique phonographs being used here. This is as scientific a test as we can hope for in the 21st century. Thank you for doing this and writing that excellent article.

Dunno about the lids--I left them up because (a) that's the way I always play my machines and (b) closing them would have disrupted the beginning of the music. As to the microphones, they were set back from the machines by around 6 feet, midway between them. I recorded the audio with a good portable stereo digital recorder and mated it to the video, discarding the audio from the camera's microphone, which was of poor quality. So the camera was close up, but the microphones were well back.

[edit] I'm just waiting for one of the ladies in the house to admonish, "Of course you left the lids up. You're a typical guy!"