The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

Hey All,

Here is a five page PDF from the Oakland Tribune - Sunday, July 14, 1929. This file contains a variety of articles and ads for the Victor Radio/Phono models for 1929.

Thanks for putting up this link.
Wow. This gives one a very accurate impression of what was meant by the term "heavily promoted". I'll go back and read the text of the articles later on, but I have a good idea of what the press copy would have been.
Interesting that photo on page 5----the gals draped over the Victor Radio with a wall of (what appears to be) player piano rolls behind them. While one can still buy player rolls today, their market would never be as quite as healthy as it was in the years leading up to this photo.

Kirkwood wrote:Thanks for putting up this link.
Wow. This gives one a very accurate impression of what was meant by the term "heavily promoted". I'll go back and read the text of the articles later on, but I have a good idea of what the press copy would have been.
Interesting that photo on page 5----the gals draped over the Victor Radio with a wall of (what appears to be) player piano rolls behind them. While one can still buy player rolls today, their market would never be as quite as healthy as it was in the years leading up to this photo.

Hi Kirkwood,

I'm glad you like the file.

-Kevin

Very interesting---thanks for posting! I notice that several ads state prices "less tubes." What gives with that? Isn't that kinda like selling a car "less engine"?

The advertising of radios and other early electronica "less tubes" seems silly to us today, but that was standard practice in the 1920s. Most of the ads you see from that period are so worded. Probably because the tubes were fairly expensive and the marketing types thought they could get away with hiding that cost with this ruse. Other than that speculation, I don't know why they did it.

Here is an RCA Radiotron AD from 1931 showing the price of tubes. Depending on the number of tubes required, the extra cost would be significant.

Price per tube:

1931 - 2011
$2.00 - $29.77
$1.25 - $18.60
$1.40 - $20.84
$1.60 - $23.81
$2.30 - $34.23
$2.20 - $32.74
$5.00 - $74.42
$6.00 - $89.30
$7.00 - $104.18

novkev24 wrote:Here is an RCA Radiotron AD from 1931 showing the price of tubes. Depending on the number of tubes required, the extra cost would be significant.

Price per tube:

1931 - 2011
$2.00 - $29.77
$1.25 - $18.60
$1.40 - $20.84
$1.60 - $23.81
$2.30 - $34.23
$2.20 - $32.74
$5.00 - $74.42
$6.00 - $89.30
$7.00 - $104.18

tubes.png

And quite often the list prices of the radios were quoted "less tubes".

The RE-45 used 6 UX226 (1929 list price $1.25), 1 UY-227 ($3.50), 2 UX-245 ($3.25) and 1 UX-280. ($3.00), so the full tube complement cost $20.50, or roughly $260 in 2010 dollars.

Note that the radio-phonograph combination itself would cost about $3500 in today's money.

While this may seem expensive, the RE-45 was a considerable aural improvement over the 1928/9 Victor range. At this price point in 1928 one could get a spring-wound portable phonograph combined in one cabinet with a pretty basic Radiola 18. M Victor's cheapest all-electric offering was the 7-26, which at $425 (less tubes) had an anemic ½ watt amplifier, tinny magnetic speaker, and the ubiquitous Radiola 18. The RE-45 out performed even the most expesive machines in the previous year's line, which sold for as much as $1500, though without the DeLuxe cabinetry or the problematic 1928 record changer.

Uncle Vanya

Somehow the darned machine signed me out in the middle, of a post!

For some reason I was logged out in the midst of writing a rather involved post about tube pricing. I hope that one of the administrators can approve my guest post!

Guest wrote: Note that the radio-phonograph combination itself would cost about $3500 in today's money.

Gosh, that's even more than a contemporary Bose tuner/CD combo!