|
Post by walrus on Jan 31, 2009 12:09:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by coyote on Feb 1, 2009 4:37:33 GMT -5
Could it possibly be an early Model L? I'm only going from the Frow book, which only shows a picture of the later L, but states that the earliest models had a "swiveling stylus-bar mounting" which "tended to cut and wear records" resulting in their being sent back to the factory. Would you consider this to be a "swiveling stylus-bar mounting"? It's a pity the oxidation appears to have been polished away. If this is indeed an early L, it's no bargain for practical use, maybe not even as a show piece at that price. Yeesh.
|
|
|
Post by maroongem on Feb 1, 2009 8:35:04 GMT -5
It looks like the sound tube from an L but man, that hinge block post looks like it would be playing a record long before the stylus hit it!!
|
|
|
Post by lukewarmwater on Feb 1, 2009 10:23:26 GMT -5
Could it possibly be an early Model L? I'm only going from the Frow book, which only shows a picture of the later L, but states that the earliest models had a "swiveling stylus-bar mounting" which "tended to cut and wear records" resulting in their being sent back to the factory. Would you consider this to be a "swiveling stylus-bar mounting"? It's a pity the oxidation appears to have been polished away. If this is indeed an early L, it's no bargain for practical use, maybe not even as a show piece at that price. Yeesh. This is the first model L referred to in the Frow book. It has a flattened-fishtail weight and an unusual hinge block. This is from my Amberola I-A serial #2. I think the one on eBay may be experimental, but not necessarily factory. The original owner was an Edison dealer. John M
|
|
|
Post by coyote on Feb 2, 2009 2:09:41 GMT -5
Thanks for the info photo of the "early" model L. It's always good to be able to identify something you've never seen before which is not depicted in the common reference books. MUCH appreciated!!
|
|
|
Post by lukewarmwater on Feb 2, 2009 5:46:58 GMT -5
Coyote,
To my knowledge, there are only three early L's known: one that was in the late Aaron Cramer's collection (I don't know current whereabouts), a gold-plated example in a California collection, and mine. Aaron also had an M with a flattened-fishtail weight -- the only one known -- but I don't know who has it now, either. I would love to have one of those for 'Ol' No. 2'!
John M
|
|
|
Post by coyote on Feb 2, 2009 12:37:26 GMT -5
A gold-plated one? That's interesting as well. I would have expected that the only finish available was the oxidized one. IMHO, the oxidized bronze (or whatever the metal is; there was a discussion on this elsewhere) trumps any other finish for beauty. It's always a shame when you find any reproducer where someone has polished away the original oxidized finish. As an aside, do you agree with Frow about this model causing premature wear of cylinders? I can see a black wax 4-min being easily worn, but a blue Amberol?
|
|
|
Post by lukewarmwater2 on Feb 2, 2009 13:54:31 GMT -5
In 1909, only the wax Amberol was available. I have played mine repeatedly using only wax Amberols ever and I have never detected any real wear. I have speculated that perhaps wax records have seasoned and become harder over the years. Perhaps records were softer when new and more prone to wear/cutting. Celluloid cylinders may shrink over time -- why shoudn't wax get harder?
|
|
|
Post by coyote on Feb 3, 2009 3:48:47 GMT -5
The theory works for me. Sorry, I wasn't thinking of the historical timeline of 4-min cylinders. Shame on me. This reminds me of the debate over whether a sapphire stylus should be dedicated to black wax or BAs only and not interchanged between them.
|
|
|
Post by lukewarmwater2 on Feb 3, 2009 10:30:48 GMT -5
In reality, who cares if you wear the sapphire stylus with a BA? You can rotate the stylus in less than 5 minutes!
John M
|
|
|
Post by matty on Feb 3, 2009 11:16:36 GMT -5
That's true, but you can't undo the damage a worn stylus does to a wax cylinder.
|
|
|
Post by maroongem on Feb 3, 2009 17:57:28 GMT -5
That's true, but you can't undo the damage a worn stylus does to a wax cylinder. I guess I'm fortunate. I have played both wax Amberols and BAs with the same Mod O. Reproducer w/sapphire stylus for years and have yet to notice any damage to an Amberol record.
|
|
|
Post by matty on Feb 4, 2009 13:10:20 GMT -5
Maybe you should wipe the needle after playing an Amberol, and see how much wax you get on your finger. If I play half a dozen celluloid cylinders with a good sapphire, they start chewing up the wax.
|
|
|
Post by maroongem on Feb 4, 2009 16:11:10 GMT -5
I always clean my stylus after every play, whether it be a BA or a wax Amberol, and I've never noticed any wax residue. Perhaps your Reproducer is bearing down too hard on the surface of the cylinder?
|
|
|
Post by matty on Feb 4, 2009 17:02:45 GMT -5
why would that be? And it doesn't get wax on it since I've turned it.
|
|