|
|
Post by crestonvalleyguy33 on Feb 28, 2010 18:22:11 GMT -5
I wondering if anyone has a source for a better belt for a Triumph. I'm not a fan of the typical stiff leather belts being thrown on machines by many collectors today. They never compare to the original belts that Edison sent his machines out with. I have come to find there are a surprising number of collectors out there (with far greater resources then myself) who have a very low standard of sound quality they expect from their machines. Stiff, thick belts with bad seams, transfer motor vibration and the bad seams add further to it. Anyone know of a rubber belt source? No seams would be best. Why not use rubber? I believe if a person had wanted to switch to another material in 1910 they could have. Am I wrong on this point? Surly there are examples of vintage replacement belts on Edison machines which were not leather. I know a collector who is busy cutting up mens 80s leather ties so he can enjoy his wobbly, vibrating, crooked sounding music. Cry! Have you heard the "restored" fireside on you-tube? YIKES
|
|
|
|
Post by phonogfp on Feb 28, 2010 21:51:53 GMT -5
I believe that the New Zealand Antique Phonograph Society (hope I got the name right) sells excellent supple leather belting material. I bought several yards worth several years ago, which is why I can't quite remember where it came from. If not NZ, then Australia.
Don't use rubber bands. There's too much stretch on the front, with slack on the back, besides which they have a very short life. "If Edison had wanted rubber bands on his machines, he'd have supplied them!"
The aim is a GOOD leather belt of proper thickness yet supple, and a smooth seam - - either a scarf or a rabbet cut. Combine the two and you'll have an effective, historically correct belt that will last many decades.
George P.
|
|
|
|
Post by crestonvalleyguy33 on Mar 1, 2010 3:31:55 GMT -5
Thanks for the help. Ill do some searching and see if anyone in that area is still making quality leather belting. I should point out no one said anything about using a rubber band? I said a rubber belt.
|
|
|
|
Post by phonogfp on Mar 1, 2010 10:50:27 GMT -5
Sorry about that. Would you explain the difference to me?
George P.
|
|
|
|
Post by Edison Restorer 64 on Mar 1, 2010 14:08:32 GMT -5
I can make them for you what siuze I have a ton already doe up will send for free please pm me with address
|
|
|
|
Post by Edison Restorer 64 on Mar 1, 2010 14:10:33 GMT -5
I mean what size that you need for this phonograph
I make them real leather Ill send 2 out for free just pay postage also
Pm Me your address and name
hope this will help sincerely Bill shenette
|
|
|
|
Post by klangfix on Mar 11, 2010 6:19:00 GMT -5
I totally agree with crestonvalleyguy. The acoustic loss from the motor through a rubber belt is greater than with a leather belt. The lifetime for a good rubber belt is around 25 years. Rubber belts have been used for some 50 years on grammophones for the same reason. We do not want the motor to produce rumble to the pickup needle.
I can live with that the rubber belt is not an original part. Some collectors can't. For them it is more important to preserve the original condition of the piece. In that case we should use antique motor oils as well. Oils that had less lubricative effect and shorter lifetime before it hardens. What I mean is that you always have to decide for your self where to draw the line.
|
|
|
|
Post by john9ten on Mar 24, 2010 14:01:50 GMT -5
I cut my own from Lining Leather. Ask at your local Tandy Leather or check their website. It looks like the old stuff, is thin and supple. Plus you can cut any width, I have even made them for a friend's COlumbia that needs that wider belting. I then use a scarf seam, thin the leather with a sharp knife on top at one end and at bottom at the other end, that way there's no 'bump' when it hits the pulley.
John
|
|
