Phonoland

I've been working on the 1917 Mahogany Grafonola with a Heineman motor. The thing was junk when I bought it. After working on it I'm really happy with the way it looks and the mechanics but the sound with the tin grafonola internal horn is really tinney. I'm thinking of coating the horn with a Rust-olum rubber sealant to get a fuller tone range. Is this a really stupid idea or should I just say it is what it is and leave it alone? I've included a picture.

I'm wondering if you replaced the gaskets in the reproducer. It's true that the horn is small, but the tinny sound quality would have more to do with the reproducer, if it's in as-found condition with hard gaskets or a frozen needle bar restricting the diaphragm's movement. Coating the horn with a sealant would prevent the horn from buzzing or rattling, but would not extend the audible range of the phonograph.

What might improve sound quality slightly--in addition to restoring the reproducer--is to make the tone chamber as air-tight as possible, using grease to seal any air gaps at the base of the tonearm, etc. But even if you do this, keep in mind, this phonograph was manufactured prior to the introduction of electrical recording. It does not have an exponential horn, or a sound box designed for electrically recorded records, so any records made after the mid-1920s would not sound that great. Certainly you'll get no bass, and probably, not much of a mid-range, as you would if they were played on some of the high quality models of the later 1920s--the Orthophonic Victrola, Columbia Viva-tonal, Acoustic Panatrope, etc..

Joe

Thanks Joe, Everything's been rebuilt with all new gaskets, felt, and diaphragm. I went ahead and coated the internal horn and it did improve the sound quality. I will add a little grease to the tonearm. I'm sure you're right about the age of the machine. I've never really listened to anything this old, I have a " modern ear". I'm really happy with the sound. Thanks for the response.

Bill

Glad to hear you were able to improve the sound quality somewhat.

I've never owned a small Columbia (pre-1925) Grafonola, but have listened to quite a few. They are generally more mellow than their Victor counterparts, and do seem to handle later records a little better, probably because of their larger sized diaphragms.

If you experiment further, you can also try different settings for the needle bar pivot, which may enhance the sound quality. Ideally, you should set it for the minimum resistance required for the diaphragm to plunge in and out with the movement of the needle bar. If too loose, though, it can cause buzzing on some notes.

Personally, my favorite era of "wind up phonographs" is the late acoustic period--those manufactured after the introduction of electrical recording. I've owned some Viva Tonal phonographs, and several Orthophonic Victrolas over the years. My favorite, of the smaller models, was a Victrola VV-2-55 that I was stupid enough to sell some 20 years ago. The sound quality was amazing for an all acoustic, non-electric portable phonograph. I've only found a few Youtube videos that do this justice. This is probably the best -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvvWPybVe-M

Joe

Great information Joe. Thank you. One thing that I'm sure also effects the sounds of my Graf is when whoever installed the Heineman motor, cut about a 1" diameter hole in the horn to accommodate the length of the Heineman's speed control barb. It was a really ugly hole with jagged-sharp edges. I cleaned up the hole as best I could and was thinking about putting a fiberglass and epoxy patch over the hole. I had to build a new top since the top I had was completely rotted and delaminated. In order to not hit the horn I would have had to raise the top up about 1". I wanted to keep it at least looking authentic but raising it that high just looked silly.

Thanks again.

Bill