|
|
Post by walrus on Feb 2, 2008 22:46:19 GMT -5
How do low-end Victor and Columbia disc machines from the teens compare? Is the VV-IV better than the Columbia Eclipse? I like the style of the Grafonola, but that tonearm design kind of gives me pause... Are they equivalent, or is the Victor markedly superior?
|
|
|
|
Post by neophone on Feb 5, 2008 19:56:35 GMT -5
Walrus,
I think if you know you have a good tone-arm an Eclipse might be better than a VV-IV. But a VV-VI is better than both. ;D Victrolas are more common today (better supply of parts), and with my very limited Grafonola experience, I'd say the Victrolas may be gentler on your records. I have four pre-Viva-Tonal Grafs but none of them are in complete working order-they all need something-two of them need new tone-arms. Columbia made a good phonograph, but I'm of the opinion Victor made a better one.
If you want a nice basic table top machine for short money-I'm of the opinion that a VV-VI will give you the most value for your money. Gad! I sound so anti-Columbia and I'm not. I'm a Columbia booster, but the brain says VTMCo.! ;D
Regards,
J.
|
|
|
|
Post by walrus on Feb 5, 2008 22:09:59 GMT -5
Is there any kind of difference in the sound quality?
|
|
|
|
Post by neophone on Feb 6, 2008 0:40:24 GMT -5
Walrus, If you compare similar machines, say an Eclipse and a VV-IV or VI, I think there is a difference. The Eclipse has an all metal horn; cast iron and sheet metal, the Victor has cast iron and wood. I think the terms you use is brighter for the Columbia and warmer for the Victor. It's somewhat subjective. I think the Victor will be louder too. I haven't done a direct comparison because I haven't re-built any Columbia reproducers for my machines yet. What do the rest of you fellows think? Come on jump in!  Put down the popcorn and start typing!  Regards, J.  |
|
ultona
Full Member
It's Not Easy Bein' Green
Posts: 164
|
Post by ultona on Feb 6, 2008 9:24:42 GMT -5
OK, OK, John!
Well, those who know me know I'm a Victor person through and through with an Edison exception (well, and a Brunswick, too!) ;D. Columbia did make a fine machine. Their motors were made very well and run quietly when clean and lubed properly. The biggest pitfall Columbias have are pot metal issues with the tonearms and even some reproducers. I find that there is a much greater tracking error with Columbias as well. So John, you basically nailed it. A Victor gives more bang for your buck in many ways. Sturdier motors, better designs that tend to be much more serviceable than Columbias and they're gentler on your precious records to boot (as long as you're using a rebuilt reproducer and properly lubed tonearm and such).
Sean
|
|
|
|
Post by walrus on Feb 6, 2008 12:22:37 GMT -5
So if I'm in the market for one of these disc machines I should get a Victor VV-VI? I see. I'm kind of preoccupied with my Amberola right now, so it'll be awhile.
Speaking of Grafanolas, have any of you ever seen a Grafonola Elite?
|
|
ultona
Full Member
It's Not Easy Bein' Green
Posts: 164
|
Post by ultona on Feb 7, 2008 9:18:39 GMT -5
I think you're better with a Victor anything!
I've had a couple of Elites over the years, nice little machines, too. I think I still have an oak one out in my workshop buried under some other projects....but that's another story!
Sean
|
|
henry
Junior Member
Posts: 58
|
Post by henry on Feb 7, 2008 11:47:44 GMT -5
If space is a consideration, the VI is probably a good choice. But I think you'll get better sound out of a floor model like the XI, especially the later ones with the larger speaker opening and the "fat" tone arm with no. 2 sound box. However, having said that, my 1917 XI (original "thin" arm, with Exhibition) puts out good clean sound with a soft-tone needle, unless the recording is one of those over-modulated electrics such as the Columbia blue labels (classical). In any case, don't pay more than $200 for a XI; they're very common, but you often see inflated prices for them on uBuy (even examples that are in rough shape---caveat emptor!).
As always, a rebuild of the sound box is essential, no matter which model you choose!
|
|
|
|
Post by walrus on Feb 10, 2008 0:43:09 GMT -5
Well, it sounds like the Grafonola isn't the wisest investment. But I've heard good things about the Viva-Tonals. Do the smaller Viva-Tonal models hold their own against comparable Victor Orthophonics?
|
|
|
|
Post by panatrope on Feb 10, 2008 3:19:52 GMT -5
No low end machine is a good investment.Not even victors.
Victor ortho's always sound better than a viva, povided the victor is a PROPER ortho model, and not just a machine with an ortho soundbox.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2008 7:50:30 GMT -5
I beg to differ. I happen to own a very nice VV-IV machine, which I had the sound box, repaired on. I had always wanted a Victrola, of course my first machine was an Edsion S-19 DD Machine. Actually, I was advised, by a number of members, that I should start with a VV-IV, since it's a good starter machine. Play's well, and loud. Also, the Victors, are easier to repair, since you can still find parts. Same with the Edsion machines.
I'm sure someone will disagree with me on that.
|
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Feb 10, 2008 8:56:49 GMT -5
Been years since I owned one, but the one thing Columbia had going for it was a very resonate tonal quality. I found it richer than the Victor internal horn machines. But the pot metal tone arms were fatal flaws in long term survival. When you get into the Viva Tonal Era the machines are excellent and easy to rebuild the reproducers unlike victor. I had the largest floor model at one time and it had an overall better range than victors in my opinion, the worse problem was it was so large and due to the use of one inner wall of the phonograph for a portion of the horn it tended to send the sound off to one side, which was aggravating when several were listening in a room.
|
|
|
|
Post by neophone on Feb 10, 2008 11:24:38 GMT -5
Panatrope,
I don't know if I'd go that far, certainly the maxim buy the best you can afford is very good advice in this hobby! I think the mid range and lower range Victors & Victrolas keep their value as long as you buy a good clean one and don't have to put a great deal into it. if you want to see some appreciation in value above inflation levels, yes an Orthophonic is a safer bet, than a Viva-Tonal or a mid or low range pre-Ortho Victrola I would think.
Walrus, I think you'll find many collectors will automatically tell you an Orthophonic is superior to the Viva-tonal. I personally have only heard one Viva-tonal in person, my portable Columbia 163. It has a wonderful rich tone, but I don't have a similar Victrola portable for comparison. The only draw back to the 163 is it's weight-it's dashed heavy!
One drawback to the Columbias is there simply isn't as much information out there. I know virtually nothing about the smaller Viva-Tonal models. What records are you most interested in Walrus, acoustic era or electric era? That must be considered when deciding on a phonograph if you don't intend to "get one of each" If you're interested in primarily acoustic recordings from the teens and early twenties, I would say definitely get a Victrola over a Columbia. If your interest is electrics as well or primarily I'd think you would be fine with either a Columbia or Victrola. Fellows, correct me if I'm wrong, but Columbia Viva-Tonals have brass tone-arms?
Regards,
J.
|
|
|
|
Post by walrus on Feb 10, 2008 15:08:20 GMT -5
I'm primarily interested in acoustic-era stuff- particularly Edison. I was just interested in what the general take on common lateral-cut machines is, and why there seems to be so little interest in Columbia's output. I'm just surprised that there doesn't seem to be a small rabid Columbia fan base out there, somewhere.
Even if Viva-Tonals aren't necessarily a good investment, are they a good value? It sounds like they have some advantages over the Orthophonic (like a much easier to rebuild reproducer), so can they be a good buy even if they aren't great collector's items?
|
|
|
|
Post by neophone on Feb 10, 2008 21:12:34 GMT -5
I'm primarily interested in acoustic-era stuff- particularly Edison. I was just interested in what the general take on common lateral-cut machines is, and why there seems to be so little interest in Columbia's output. I'm just surprised that there doesn't seem to be a small rabid Columbia fan base out there, somewhere. Even if Viva-Tonals aren't necessarily a good investment, are they a good value? It sounds like they have some advantages over the Orthophonic (like a much easier to rebuild reproducer), so can they be a good buy even if they aren't great collector's items? Walrus, I think the Viva-Tonals are a fair investment. It's the earlier Columbias that have most of the problems. One part of the problem with the Viva-Tonals (V-T from hereon) I think is their relative scarcity compared to Orthophonics. I am a fan of Columbia myself, but I recognize that the Victor (pre '25) is kinder to my records so the Columbias are more static displays. (That's not to say I never use them.) I think the V-Ts have some negative to their horn design, at least some collectors have said as much, not having heard one in person, I'm keeping an open mind. I think there is a rabid Columbia faction out there-it's just that they're to busy looking for replacement tone arms too comment on web-boards like this!  Regards, J.  |
|
