If it's restored with an overhauled diaphragm and fresh gaskets, and the stylus tip is in undamaged condition or a correct replacement has been installed, it should sound quite good, providing, of course, the record is in good to excellent condition, and the cylinder spins true and not wobbly. The Amberola 50, which has a larger horn, will outperform the 30, providing more fullness to the music. The Amberola 30 has what I'd call a more sparkling tone, and is especially well suited to bell, xylophone or coronet solos.
Compared to a Victrola, it's hard to say. The surface noise is about the same, but the Amberola Phonograph's sound quality is more "up-front," since Edison used a "dead studio" process for his records, meaning that as little reflection or resonance was captured as possible. According to "From Tinfoil to Stereo," he insisted that all instruments be recorded at the same volume level, so that one instrument's sound would not "blend into" or mask that of another. In contrast, companies such as Victor or Columbia tried to record as much room resonance as possible, which tended to make the music sound more three dimensional, albeit somewhat hollow compared to later electrical recordings.
Neither the Amberola 30 nor the 50 have horns as large as the full size Victrolas of the period, but their design was more efficient, and as air-tight as possible. (All Victrolas made before the introduction of the Orthophonic line suffered from air leaks in their tone chambers, though this can be reduced by packing grease around the base of the tonearm, where most of the sound is lost.")
Now, if you compare a well restored full size (and rare) Amberola 1A or 1B model with a similar size Victrola VV-XVI, the Amberola would probably be the hands down winner..stressing, again, that the record, itself, is in good condition, and is spinning without wobble. The music will be more up-front, and in many ways, sound far more natural. Compared to a small Victrola table top model, the Amberola 50 would probably win, performance-wise.
SEE:
http://www.intertique.com/EdisonAmberolaTutorial.htmlTo get about the same sound quality as the Amberola models, another option is the far more available Edison Diamond Disc Phonograph, which used the same basic technology--cork-dampened rice-paper diaphragm, precision ground diamond stylus, feed screw propulsion, air-tight tone chamber, etc.--but applied it to the disc format.
The Diamond Disc Phonograph, by the way, has one definite advantage over the Amberola, aside from the fact that its records are far more available. Starting in 1915, all Ambrerol masters were acoustically dubbed from Diamond Disc records, which means that they have a rather second-hand sound quality compared to the discs. SEE:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Amberol_RecordsHTH,
JDS