|
|
Post by larryh on May 31, 2007 18:14:14 GMT -5
Since I have returned to Edisons I am making a concerted effort to obtain the best possible sound from my machines. To this end I have obtained most of the new diaphragms available in hopes of finding that yet "better" sound..
After a brief but telling test I have reached a conclusion.
So far no new diaphram can match the fullness of sound, tone, and volume of the originals..
I wonder how many of you have actually been able to directly compare a good original against a new replacement? I found that there is a flatness of the low sound and a real distance to the back up instruments in the solo parts. Sometimes the piano records fell significantly comparing the two. In fact I would guess you would be quite surprised at the yet better sound the old has over the new if your not familiar with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Matt Brown on May 31, 2007 19:14:20 GMT -5
I think I'll have to agree with you on that, Larry. I have come across a few Edison reproducers that have original diaphragms, gaskets, etc. that sounds just phenomenal. I know Wyatt Marcus has great success with rebuilding reproducers using new diaphragms and gaskets, but I have not been able to get the same results. Of course, I am not one to spend hours "tweaking" things (I don't HAVE hours to spend tweaking things).
I got an Edisonic from Bill that he rebuilt - I'd have to look to be sure, but I think it has an original dia. (Bill?) - I do remember Bill telling me that he made the gaskets himself, and I would think that must be why it sounds so good (on top of he did a nice job with the rebuild).
Then there's the Standard DD reproducer that I sold to Rocky (it was on his C-450) - never been touched at all - sounds fantastic! Almost as good as an Edisonic.
Matt
|
|
|
|
Post by rocky on May 31, 2007 19:29:30 GMT -5
Matt, that Edisonic that you got from Bill is phenomenal. I remember the day that we tested it out with two other Edisonics--it was the loudest. The standard reproducer that was in my C-450 has been moved to the C-250--Wyatt tweaked it when he was over, and it's LOUD. Wyatt told me that the standard was loud enough and there was no need to replace it with an Edisonic.
Since Wyatt worked his magic on the reproducer, the sound is solid and distortion-free no matter how loud the sound.
Rocky
|
|
|
|
Post by larryh on May 31, 2007 22:38:54 GMT -5
Are we talking original "tweeted" here or new? I had a new rebuild and instantly knew something was amiss when I got it back.. Now I am positive of the results.. I think something needs to be put to rest here too.. There is no secret or "Tuning" as such.. If you can dissasemble the thing and put two new rubber gaskets avaiable from the net or our members you can restore it to amazing sound if the diaphragm is sound. Perhaps I was lucky this time to get two that had excellent sounding old diaphragms that only needed gaskets replaced.. Well what else is there? The tuning can only consist of adjusting the ring that holds it all in place tighter or looser. But I have already found that with a medium snug fit they will play fine..
I have discussed this with two of the designers of the diaphragms. I tried to explain what I was hearing or not hearing.. I don't know if it will do any good.
Truly today when I played the same record with the old and then the different new designs I was taken back by what was some pretty major differences in sound quality.. Maybe I am cursed with good hearing when it comes to phonographs, and I don't know how well that these differences could be represented if recorded on "tone" test so to speak.. I would say though that probably only about a two thirds representation of the records came through at best and about half at the worst. Some passages on the piano where the playing was loud was so much more forceful and full on the old, not so on the new. And the quiter notes had a tendency to nearly fade away comparitively. On some of the popular pieces I was struck by how though the horns were coming out at a fair volume and in many cases reasonably clear, the back up which makes the total picture successful was almost like it wasn't there.. I had to keep repeating that to be sure what I was hearing. And all the new ones suffer from that high end clipping or distortion in many places, one of my main disappointments with one either new or old The new gasket seems to take care of that on the old. If you have a reproducer I urge you not to trade off the original diaphragm in hopes of better sound.. I encourage those who are creating them to do some more home work and come up with a really successful replacement.. Its not wonder edison did over a thousand different test before the present original was accepted.
I am reluctant to challange products here, but feel a free and open discussion is best for the hobby over all.
|
|
|
|
Post by gramophoneshane on Jun 1, 2007 8:18:38 GMT -5
Out of the 3 standard reproducer I have, 1 original sounds better, and 1 not as good as the new diaphram I bought. All have new gaskets. The new diaphram just doesn't quite have the same tone as the good original, but I still think it's great. I've been thinking of getting another new one, and trying to put the cork from an old diaphram on it, just to see how much it alters the sound.
Do any of the new one's include the cork centre. I'm starting to think it's the key ingredient to THAT edison sound..
|
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Jun 1, 2007 9:09:26 GMT -5
Shane,
Edison also used rubber way back, the last one I got for my comparisons had old rubber, hardened and all cracked.. He used both. The way I see this is if the gasket is bad, of either type the sound will be poor. But the acutal sound is made by the diaphragm.
I know at this point were talking somewhat subltle differences, some not so subtle.. If you were here you could easily make out the differences. Those differences in tone, volume and overall responsiveness are all characteristics of the construction of the diaphragm. Edison went to great lengths to prefect something that "recreated" sound. He didn't cut a crude circle out of a box and call it perfected.... Yes it plays, yes it can be fairly loud. But its like the difference between a cheap stereo and a fine stereo. The quality is in the hearing. If your original diaphragm isn't playing with richer, fuller sound than the new one you need to look for another.. That is if your really interested in hearing all the qualities that make the Edison so unique in there original glory. A lot of people will be happy just to have reasonably loud sound that seems good. I am only trying to point out that you can have amazing sound as edison designed it.. Any thing else is pretty much a diminished version..
This also boils down to what makes you happy. I admit to being a fanatic for the finest possible sound from my machines and over the years parted with nearly any that wouldn't live up to that. In hind site I wish I would have kept some, but I don't regret the search for original sound.
|
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Jun 1, 2007 9:14:25 GMT -5
shane,
Sorry I forgot the question.. Yes one person is offering what appears to be a somewhat close copy of the original diaphragm. I didn't discover that till after I had tried or ordered the three other ones available. I will have to go ahead and give it a test.
I had the feeling that the additonal weight the "cone" and the lower cork piece play a large role in the overall solid sound of the original. It still may depend though on the complex way the materials are applied to effect the over all tone in a positive way.
|
|
|
|
Post by maroongem on Jun 1, 2007 10:19:28 GMT -5
Folks, A while back, I did a post on one of the "new" diaphragms that I had run across. It was brought to me by an acquaintance as a recently purchased Reproducer from Ebay. His complaint was that it didn't sound as good as his other rebuilt Reproducers, so we tried it out on one of my machines, and I had to agree that the quality of sound just wasn't there. I disassembled it, and below you will find pics of what was used. I haven't a clue as to whose handiwork this is, but if this an example of expert tuning, I'll stick with new gaskets & an original diaphragm, and I suppose I could peruse the laundry aisle in the local super and find which product the disk was cut from!!! After about 1923, Edison began using cork as gaskets in lieu of the rubber, and the beauty of these gaskets is that they are reusable as long as they don't break on you!! You will find these in the Dance & New Standards(Edisonics). Tim Fabrizo was at one time offering very good diaphragms made in the old way for both the smaller Reproducers like the Diamond A,B,C, and for the Disc Reproducres as well. I don't know who made these, but they sound great!!! Bill   |
|
|
|
Post by maroongem on Jun 1, 2007 10:21:21 GMT -5
I think I'll have to agree with you on that, Larry. I have come across a few Edison reproducers that have original diaphragms, gaskets, etc. that sounds just phenomenal. I know Wyatt Marcus has great success with rebuilding reproducers using new diaphragms and gaskets, but I have not been able to get the same results. Of course, I am not one to spend hours "tweaking" things (I don't HAVE hours to spend tweaking things). I got an Edisonic from Bill that he rebuilt - I'd have to look to be sure, but I think it has an original dia. (Bill?) - I do remember Bill telling me that he made the gaskets himself, and I would think that must be why it sounds so good (on top of he did a nice job with the rebuild). Then there's the Standard DD reproducer that I sold to Rocky (it was on his C-450) - never been touched at all - sounds fantastic! Almost as good as an Edisonic. Matt Yes Matt, That was the original diaphragm. I just installed new gaskets and freed up the stylus bar to pivot properly. Bill |
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Jun 1, 2007 10:42:34 GMT -5
Bill,
Thanks for the photos.. Two of the new one are made from this similar material, the third is a bit different.. On my first try of the third one when I first got it I didn't think it was as good as the ones simlar to your photo. But on the test against the other two I discovered that it actually sounded better. I believe from the way the string is attached I know which it is you have shown. But I am reluctant to start picking exact ones apart.
|
|
|
|
Post by condensite on Jun 1, 2007 18:07:43 GMT -5
In my limited experience I've only replaced original diaphragms when the silk link was broken. I've used the newer diaphragms made with printed cardboard such as what's been posted here, which generally seem louder, and also tried the older fashioned cork-centered reproductions, which really weren't very well made. They seem a bit muffled, but somewhat appropriate for a metal cygnet horn on my Fireside.
Then I lose track of what I did on which machine, and start over!
I really think having an assortment of different gaskets and the time to tinker with them would be a good plan in the future for me.
C
|
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Jun 1, 2007 19:29:59 GMT -5
Playing thru the three new cardboard versions I had here gave me some unexpected results, and as you say its fun.. I am still playing pieces and then switching reproducers to see what the differences are.. So far the results are the same.. And as to loudness, I have heard that complaint about the old ones since I have been around these past few months. And really years ago when I had my first console William and Mary, it seemed to be rather quite by comparison to other types of machines, (non edison). But all the original diaphragms I have run into now, which is three so far, are the equal too and louder than the new ones.. The most important part to me and a point I guess I am hung up on is the ability of the original to bring out the rich complexity of the music which is lacking in the new ones. In other words if you think your really hearing great things with a new one, you would be most impressed with the original if its good.. I am interested in your commment on the closest copy of the original which so far I don't own.. it was my guess that to recreate the effects the old one made was not as easy as adding extra pieces too it. I think the Orthophonic design is somewhat a take off of the edison multi- level diaphragm. Those extra parts when well designed add important parts to the sound.
|
|
|
|
Post by orthophonic on Jun 4, 2007 8:12:16 GMT -5
I have only used original diaphragms and what has worked for me was to use new rubber gaskets and do not overtighten them. Also be sure that you have no air leaks and they seem to sound pretty good to me :-)
|
|
