Need Gramophone advice

I have some old 78 records, but nothing to play them on. A friend suggested buying one of those reproduction gramophones for sale on ebay. Some of them cost less that $100.

What do you think of these gramophones? Are they worth buying? Thanks in advance for the help.

The reproduction gramophone you refer to is known as a "Crap-O-Phone" by most collectors -- SEE: http://www.mainspringpress.com/crapo.html or http://www.oldcrank.com/articles/crapop ... hones.html

I've heard/read a number of horror stories concerning these. In addition to ruining most records you try to play on them, they normally break after a short while, and are not worth repairing. (Keep in mind, these are slapped together, and fitted out with poorly made "reproduction" parts, and motors culled from junker machines.)

If you want to invest in a "wind up" phonograph/gramophone, your best bet would be to spend a little more and get a good condition, name brand portable such as an HMV 102, a Victor VV-2-55, a Columbia Viva Tonal, a Decca 50, etc. These come up for sale all the time on eBay.

HMV 102---> http://www.gramophones.info/gramophones ... 02.red.jpg

Victor VV-2-55---> http://www.garlic.com/~tgracyk/portable3jpg.jpg


Columbia Viva-Tonal--->
http://www.worldofgramophones.com/viva- ... ograph.JPG


--------------------------------------------------------

A big issue concerns when these records were manufactured. If they are from the mid-1930s onward, they really were not designed to be played on an acoustic or wind-up type gramophone. In this case, and if you're not too particular about sound quality, you can pick up one of the new production three speed electric phonographs produced by Crosley, etc. (Go to http://www.froogle.com and type in phonograph or "record player" to see what's available.) These generally cost less than most Crap-O-Phones, and have the added advantage of playing 45s and LPs, in addition to 78s.

A friend of mine has the Crosley CR49, and while it's not audiophile quality, it does a pretty good job with most later production (1940s/1950s era) 78s --


Crosley CR49---> http://shop.com.edgesuite.net/ccimg.sho ... 639811.jpg

ALSO: Another option, for about a $30-50 investment, would be to get a good condition used three or four speed Califone phonograph. Again, these come up for sale all the time on eBay. The sound quality is normally very good, and you can get a special needle for playing 78s.

Califone---> http://www.perishablerecords.com/califo ... e_unit.jpg

Thanks for the information. I had no idea that the reproductions (Crap-O-Phones) were so terrible. Maybe I will investigate one of the other options you suggest.

I use a good electronic record player from the late 1950s or early 1960s. The sound is so much better than can be had by any acoustic player, and the records don't wear out rapidly like they do on an acoustic player.

I would hazard a guess that Record Changer hasn't had the opportunity to hear a good acoustic machine like an EMG or Expert. I haven't yet heard any 1950's / 60's electronic equipment that can match an EMG acoustic machine for shear presence and quality of reproduction. The only reason for the demise of these beautiful machines was like everything else since: the public at large get rail-roaded into following the "new path" and believing everything that manufacturers throw at them ie electric must have been better than acoustic because it was all NEW; CD must be better than LP because it was NEW digitial technology. In nearly every case, the succeeding "development" fell a long way short of the original item it replaced and many years (particularly in the 1945-1975 period) passed before the new replaced the old with something actually better. There always seems to be a "catching up" period before the successive technologies actually improve upon (if indeed they ever do - CD v. Lp etc?) the earlier technology.

As far as record wear is concerned, using fibre needles on a well designed acoustic machine actaully does less damage to records than sapphire or diamond tipped stylii which (in most cases) were designed to play later 78's and actually wreck early records.

You are 100% correct Steve. I just purchased a Victor VV-280 wind up console and can not believe how nice the acoustic records sound on it and how well that sound fills the room. . I am using steel needles that I replace with every record and have a few thousand records in my collection so there is little chance of wearing any of them down. Also there is something earthy about having to change the record after each tune is played. You sort of bond with the machine and it's beautiful craftsmanship that is lost on modern equipment.

STEVE wrote:I would hazard a guess that Record Changer hasn't had the opportunity to hear a good acoustic machine like an EMG or Expert. I haven't yet heard any 1950's / 60's electronic equipment that can match an EMG acoustic machine for shear presence and quality of reproduction. The only reason for the demise of these beautiful machines was like everything else since: the public at large get rail-roaded into following the "new path" and believing everything that manufacturers throw at them ie electric must have been better than acoustic because it was all NEW; CD must be better than LP because it was NEW digitial technology. In nearly every case, the succeeding "development" fell a long way short of the original item it replaced and many years (particularly in the 1945-1975 period) passed before the new replaced the old with something actually better. There always seems to be a "catching up" period before the successive technologies actually improve upon (if indeed they ever do - CD v. Lp etc?) the earlier technology.

As far as record wear is concerned, using fibre needles on a well designed acoustic machine actaully does less damage to records than sapphire or diamond tipped stylii which (in most cases) were designed to play later 78's and actually wreck early records.

I agree with you, Sentjourn, that there is something wholly unique about the mechanical / acoustic machine usage. Very few cabinets made post-1930 were anywhere near as good a quality as those from the 1920's or even earlier. Cellulose finishes took over from French polish and hand-waxed cases and veneered ply from solid wood. As electric pickups and tone-arms came in, so we lost the wonderful array of different soundbox designs with (in some cases) an infinite amount of tuning possibilities and colourfully designed fascias. The electrical pick-up / cartridge / pickup arm arrangement does not have the same tactile quality as the earlier devices. There was also something very pure and "exact" about acoustic reproduction whereas with the process of converting mechanical vibrations to an electrical signal, electrically amplifying it and then converting it back to sound via a horned loudspeaker, something gets lost and complaints about the sound being "artificial" were commonplace amongst audiophiles of the day.

A friend of mine made me laugh recently by confessing his fetish for sniffing early acoustic machines.....if you've ever lifted the lid on an early wind-up and smelt that cocktail of old polished wood, leather, motor grease and metal polish, you'll instantly relate to that as well!

Long live the acoustics!

E M Ginn also noted that with acoustic machines (and specifically external horn models) it is possible to use your room surfaces ie walls and ceiling, as part of the sound system to further increase the horn "reflection" process.........

STEVE wrote:I would hazard a guess that Record Changer hasn't had the opportunity to hear a good acoustic machine like an EMG or Expert. I haven't yet heard any 1950's / 60's electronic equipment that can match an EMG acoustic machine for shear presence and quality of reproduction...

Hi Steve:

This article from "hi>>fi World" echoes many of your statements --




OLDE WORLDE - E.M.G. MODEL 10B ACOUSTIC GRAMOPHONE (1936)
http://www.hi-fiworld.co.uk/hfw/oldewor ... el10b.html

yes, I've seen this article before - I know the owner of the machine pictured in the article and was talking to him a few weeks ago about it! In fact I bought an EMG soundbox of him as well. The valuation of the machine given was a bit "over-enthusiastic" to say the least. But in typical hi-fi press fashion, the writer did manage to convey at least a little of the experience of listening to an EMG to a presumably rather close-minded audience who would otherwise be listening to their CD players?

My reason for not wanting to use an acoustic machine is that I want to prevent record wear. I love the music on the records.

Record-changer wrote:My reason for not wanting to use an acoustic machine is that I want to prevent record wear. I love the music on the records.

If you replace the needleafter no more than one or two records you will not do any harm to the records, unless you expect to play the same record over and over.
There are new electric units that are made to look old fasioned but are high tech modern units that will work great for under $200.00. I use a unit made by Teac when I am cataloging my records and play them to grade the condition. Crosley also has similar units.

see my earlier note regarding record wear - fibres do LESS damage than sapphire tips!!!