|
Post by larryh on Feb 2, 2008 8:31:42 GMT -5
New update, starting to sound like the old updates.. A good try and then a difficult act to follow.. Its rather mysterious to me as to what the small variances are that cause such changes. One may have wonderful volume, another nearly the same will be lackluster in volume and tone, and worse yet, the clear sound I had can become buzz city! I am determined to solve this if I live long enough.. Another two weeks like these and it may shorten that time!
|
|
|
Post by phonogfp on Feb 2, 2008 8:53:16 GMT -5
Luke,
Most Bettini diaphragms were sheets of thin aluminum, clamped and stretched on the carrier arm, much like a banjo. When properly adjusted, they sound great, but the aluminum DOES stretch over time.
George Paul
|
|
|
Post by maroongem on Feb 2, 2008 9:31:07 GMT -5
Larry,
According to Frow, there were over 2,300 trials to perfect the rice paper diaphragm that Edison subsequently used in his DD and Amberola machines, with up to 40 layers of tissue used, each layer being .001 thick. You may wish to try a paper such as the type used in gift wrap. Also, are you using some type of stiffener in the center like the cork one used by Edison?
Bill
|
|
|
Post by lukewarmwater on Feb 2, 2008 9:43:59 GMT -5
Luke, Most Bettini diaphragms were sheets of thin aluminum, clamped and stretched on the carrier arm, much like a banjo. When properly adjusted, they sound great, but the aluminum DOES stretch over time. George Paul Bettini! Then my wondering is in good company, eh? I've looked at a number of Bettinis but never owned one to disassemble or even seen one apart. How was the stretching accomplished? Was the sheet aluminum pulled down over a ring by the outer trim ring with all the machine screws in it? Certainly aluminum would stretch . . . I'd still like to see what would happen with a more dimensionally stable material like polyester drum/banjo skin or graphite fiber. Luke W.
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Feb 2, 2008 9:54:45 GMT -5
Luke,
Yes as part of my quest I am incorporating several rings to the basic diaphragm. I think they are necessary for depth of sound.. The ones without at quite lackluster in comparison to what I have so for achieved so I know its possible.. I could live with a few flaws here and there in some pieces, but getting a repetition of one that appears promising is a bigger problem than I anticipated.
|
|
|
Post by lukewarmwater on Feb 2, 2008 10:12:12 GMT -5
Larry -- Just to be clear . . . In my head I'm referring to Edison cylinder or DD reproducers and I'm talking about a metal "tone" ring under the diaphragm that would support it over the tone chamber. The metal ring would be slightly smaller than the inner diameter of the screw-in retaining ring to allow for the thickness of the diaphragm when the retaining ring is set over the diaphragm would be slightly over-sized and have a metal wire ring embedded around the edge so that when the retaining ring is tightened into the reproducer body over the tone ring and diaphragm, it has something to push against to tighten the diaphragm over the tone ring. That's what I'm talking about when I say "ring(s)" -- there would be three of them my theoretical design . . . . but . . . . I get the feeling that you are talking about laminating discs or rings onto your diaphragm material itself to build up thickness in certain areas. Is that correct? I'm just not sure we are on the same page . . . you're talking apples and I'm talking oranges? Luke W.
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Feb 2, 2008 11:36:08 GMT -5
Luke,
Yes were talking paper coated with shellac as a laminate over the base diaphragm.. I have had pretty decent sound results with it but not perfect, ( which actually I didn't start out accomplish anyway), but as I started this discussion I am cursed with wanting clear sound from my machines and in the days I didn't know better I got rid of a lot of very fine machines because I was unable to get the to sound as I thought they should.. Your idea with the aluminum is as was mentioned something that showed up now and then in some early machines. I recall seeing those type.. In some ways the orthophonic design is similar also. Like you, without a drawing of what your describing, I have a hard time telling exactly what your purposing as an idea?
|
|
|
Post by phonogfp on Feb 2, 2008 15:25:33 GMT -5
Precisely. A nice design, but not maintenance-free.
George Paul
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Feb 3, 2008 18:54:58 GMT -5
I must be up to at least 40 tries by now.. some are very promising, and then when I try the same, same old story, can't quite get the overall sound I want.. This is a bit self defeating because I set out get it to play better than the new things currently available, but then that darn perfectionism took control and every time I hear something good I detect something I don't like on another record.. Two weeks now and still not where I want to be.. I just want something that will go together and work consistantly, but that has be much harder than I could have imagined when I started this..
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Feb 4, 2008 9:44:25 GMT -5
Some good news finally! I needed that.. After two weeks of repeated failures with a design that I had heard some great sound from now and then, for a while at least, I decided to change glues as it was the most likely cause of the way things were going.. When I tested it last night it was mushy and distorted at best. However this morning after aging overnight it plays nearly flawless. Even things that I couldn't get to do well with the old glue are now very clear.. Matter a fact it is the clearest thing with wide tonal range and volume I have yet to hear. Now if I can only make it work the second, third, forth time I will be happy. But don't want to get too excited as so far those follow ups have been elusive. Maybe though this will be different.
|
|
|
Post by lukewarmwater on Feb 4, 2008 9:59:16 GMT -5
Many glues never set up hard and remain in a pliable state even after they cure. Hide glue, shellac, and certain epoxies will set up hard. Luke W.
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Feb 4, 2008 17:43:17 GMT -5
Things are now on the upswing again.. I just discovered after getting some new rubber gaskets from George, that they reduced almost to nothing a irritating high frequency buzz I was getting. At first It seemed to come from the room, but closer checking it seems to have been from the reproducer.. I switched the gaskets, and didn't turn it quite so tightly and not only is the good tone improved but searching for a buzz has for now stopped. I may have to try a few changes in some parts of the design to see if it reduces or adds to the situation.. I have four today I am putting together in the hope that they will sound like this one I have now.. Cross your fingers, I am..
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Feb 5, 2008 9:27:23 GMT -5
If your following this saga here is this mornings update.. The try with the new glue gave excellent results with a tiny amount of flaws yesterday.. So, being a optimist, (which I am not), I took a chance and made four like it.. Wouldn't you know, they are pretty close, but so far the two I have tested throughly had a bit of a clipping kind of sound in places the first doesn't.. Such is the search for clean sound. In studying them I can see some small differences in the width of the pieces I have applied to the basic part. Maybe that is the issue. Since the first two do the same it may be. At least for a change the differences from piece to piece are much closer than in the last set where evidently the glue I used gave wildly different results, most bad after the glue set. So far these are maintaining the level of sound that was evident when first cured so that is at least a plus.. Still finding a slight tendency to create a buzzing effect on some sounds.. Part of the problem seems to be in the machine, some the reproducer.. I may be creating more vibration than the originals did which would add to that effect. It may be why the Edisons are somewhat quite and dampened down so much.. Given the amount of sound in the records, when you go for a lively sound you may achieve too much feed back? Once I get the quality of the new one again on a few tries I intend to make some small changes in it to see if I can achieve less vibration without totally killing the output.. some of the old ones when the glue set completely became very lifeless.
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Feb 5, 2008 17:38:49 GMT -5
I guess this is turing into sort of a blog on trying to achieve a diaphragm that will give superior results.. Towards that end today was perhaps the best yet.. Several things feel into place that made what I was hearing nearly unbelievable.. First I should have know better, but I had obtained a new (old) reproducer for my testing.. Good needle I think, but I had oiled and worked the hinge block, but today after looking endlessly for the cause of some odd sounds while tracking I realized the thing was darn near frozen up.. so I sprayed it with every kind of lube and soaked the tail in gasoline.. More W-D40 and finally it began to move effortlessly.. Now mind you if yours is stiff, you may be missing something because at once I could tell the sound was clearer and heard less feedback from the record surface. Then after searching and fretting over a problem buzz that I heard in many places I decided to change my linkage for the Stylus.. I had a wire sort of looped up though the top and through the piece I was using as a amplifier.. But even though it was pretty tightly enclosed I think that much of the feedback was due to the wires vibrating and evidently feeding off each other.. I had been suspibcous of that all along.. When I changed to a single wire with a simple bend to force against the top of the amplifier I got the cleanest sound yet.. so now I have wide range of volume, and increasingly clear sound.. Still not 100% perhaps but very satisfying day..
|
|
|
Post by lukewarmwater on Feb 5, 2008 17:57:38 GMT -5
WD-40 is not really a good lubricant. It was invented and intended as a rust-proofer (Water Displacement Formula #40). It is actually fish oil in an evaporative carrier. I would recommend a fine oil such as watch oil for long-term lubrication of fine pivot points such as needle bars.
|
|