Anyone else here have a handcranker?

[Steve E.]

Anyone else here have a handcranker?

This is Steve Hoffman's handcranker....same model as mine. I have a Brunswick Ultona from the 1920's.
http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=17543&stc=1



It can play three different formats of 78's RPM: The common Victrola-style discs with lateral grooves, the thick Edison "Diamond Discs" with vertical hill and valley grooves (and, 80 RPM speed, actually), and even the French Pathe lateral discs which started at the center and moved outwards (I've never seen one of these discs).

The reproducer can swivel and click to three different positions. The arm stretches forward, as well. That's how it can handle the different discs. It's like one of those little Japanese "transformer" superhero dolls from the 80's!

It doesn't play the Edison discs "correctly". It would need a special tonearm with a tracking mechanism for that. Allegedly this thing will cause more damage to the discs over time. My Edison discs are already pretty worn anyway, so who cares?

The tone arm (or "reproducer" as it is called) is heavy as all hell, and could easily grind the heck out of an acetate in a few plays if the full weight is placed on the disc. I set the counterweight to its lightest setting, in opposition to the instruction manual recommends. I use Graythorne brand antique cactus needles when playing my cuts, because they are softer and do less damage. Unfortunately, they are also much quieter than the standard steel needles.

It doesn't play "electronic" discs very well; it is a pre-"orthophonic" handcranker. That is to say, records made from around 1926 on are louder and have a wider frequency range, because they were recorded using microphones rather than horns. The reproducer can't track them so well. They distort during playback, and it may even be that the grooves are getting damaged. I just found some narrower "quiet" steel needles which seem to play them with a more pleasant tonality.

Despite the limitations of this thing, I love it! If I get more dough one of these days I might start collecting these guys. I'm kicking myself that I passed up a homely portable Sonora handcranker a few years back. I've been told that those have a particularly good sound.

I'd love to do some performance art pieces involving playing a few of these at the same time. It's been done before, but so what?

[grooveguy]

Hi, Steve, I'm really surprised that this is the first reply to your post since last December. I have a Pazatone (British) low-boy phono from 1929 (date on the tag of the Collaro motor) that I have restored to living-room condition. The interior horn is sheetmetal (and sounds it!), but the player does work quite well.

Some time ago I came across a source for "thorn" needles and the necessary sharpener. One of these needles just barely lasts long enough to play one side of a 78, but the tone is a good deal mellower than with a steel needle, and of course there's less damage to the record.

I wonder if any members of the Society have interest in all-acoustical recording and playback? It would be a kick to do some live recordings with a horn, and with the benefit of today's materials and technology, these might not sound as bad as some of those done in the '20s.

[chris muth]

Hi Steve,

Apparently, the is a studio in Arizona that has a stage set up for acoustic recording with handcrafted but modern components. It is an experiment to push the state of the art in non-electrical recording using modern materials, etc. Man's gotta have a hobby! I heard about it through a friend and will try to get more details soon for you (like its name, for instance).

best,
cm

[flozki]

another handcranker....hmmm.


http://www.floka.com/lofi/dbmastering.html

cheers.
f.

[cuttercollector]

I would be very interested in knowing about modern experiments with an all acoustic setup. Not necesisarily hand cranked. I too wonder what results could be had with modern materials and CAD systems. Stereo using our normal 45/45 system would be pretty hard to do (think about it) but I might have figured a way around even that. It's another one of those things that if I had unlimited time and money, I would love to play with.

[Perisphere]

It might work, but any sounds common to both horns would result in a vertical groove modulation (hey, just cut at 80 rpm, and advertise the records as mono-compatible with your Pathephone or other vertical-groove players! ).

I actually do have a small wind-up machine, a Columbia Grafonola made in England in the mid-20s. Aluminum diaphragm in the sound box. Been in the family for years; I don't know the model number though it looks similar to the American portable model 150, minus its record storage space and slot. Still works. Made gaskets for the sound box out of pieces of white lamp power cord as the original white rubber parts were hardened and cracked, permitting rattle.

[buckettovsissors]

May sound a little dumb ,but I thought there must be hand cutters too, A grammphone cutter.
Anyone know any models?

[tsullivan]

I to am interested in the acoustic era, and always wondered what an early recording studio looked like. The very earliest example I saw a picture of was before they knew how to duplicate cylinder records. There was a bank of perhaps a dozen or more horns, each feeding a cutting head. The orchestra and singers would gather around the horns and do a performance and cut 12 cylinders. Then, the machines would be reloaded, and the performers would do the number again. And on and on, all day, the performers would do the same number over and over again. I would imagine that a singer would be pretty horse by the end of a full day of recording.

My favorite singer from that era is Billy Murray. He was probably the "Elvis" of that era, and was very popular.

There were format wars in those early days too. Edison had his cylinders, but under competition from Victor, started making the flat Diamond discs. Of course that was yet a different format from all the other disc records which were lateral cut (they called them "needle cut" back then). But Edison did produce needle cut (lateral cut) records too, I have a few examples.

The Edison Diamond disc players used a needle very similar to the cylinder player needles. And the tonearm of a Diamond disc player was lead by a lead screw under the motorboard, similar to the home disc cutters of a later era. There were several attempts to build phonographs, like the Brunswick mentioned above, that would play the Edison discs as well as lateral discs, but it was harder on the records since the Edison discs were not designed to guide the reproducer. I have seen adapters for Victor machines that would allow the reproducer to pivot 90 degrees, to play Edison discs, similar in principle to the turnover cartridges we have today, but they were a compromise.

An acoustic reproducer should never be used to play modern electrically recorded 78's. But many people don't observe this, and play 78's from the 40's or even 50's on their handcrankers. That will ruin the records for any good playback on more modern players, even with just one play. Besides wiping out any high frequency material the modern 78's have, modern 78's are actually pressed with softer shellac and don't have the abrasive in the shellac to grind down the steel needles as the record plays.

And not all early phonographs were handcrankers. Electric motors were an option on many of them, but it was a special order option. Only well off people living in the big cities had electricity back in those days, so you very seldom see a Victor Orthophonic or other acoustic player with an electric motor.

The first electrically recorded records were actually designed to be played on acoustic players, and have their frequency response tailored to that end. Thats because they couldn't expect everyone to run out and buy electrical players right away. And the first electrical players with their huge horseshoe magnet magnetic cartridges were just as heavy and hard on records as the acoustic reproducers were.

Tom

[flashbk13]

Hi,
I have a 1903 Edison Standard B 2 minute cylinder phono with original recorder (cutter) and a 1911 Columbia Dictaphone electric shaver. Rick.

[emorritt]

Just joined this forum; I have several old phonos including an Orthophonic Credenza, VV-X, Columbia BI, Edison Triumph, Victor Schoolhouse, etc. Used to have more, but got married - you know the rest. Anyway, I have done a lot of experimenting and research with cylinder recording since I'm interested in disc cutting already, even did some demonstrations and lectures when I worked in higher education. Got published after a demo at the Bristol TN 75th anniversary of the Bristol Sessions (the editors really messed up some of my article though). As a sideline in my business now I do restoration work to help preserve old recordings, disc-cylinder-shellac-tape-wire, you name it. Anyway just thought I'd post something since not many here seem to be into the prehistoric days of sound recording. (I love acoustic recording!!!!) >:)

[Steve E.]

May sound a little dumb ,but I thought there must be hand cutters too, A grammphone cutter.
Anyone know any models?

Not a dumb question at all, but perhaps a disappointing answer. To the best of my knowledge, cutters in the acoustic era were generally one-of-a-kind machines. It seems a little unlikely as I write this, though. Maybe a better way to say it is that they were made or commissioned by the recording companies that used them, and were proprietary? Hmm! What about people who did field recordings? Where did they get their equipment?

A good question for Peter Dilg. He gave me an answer once, but I'm foggy as I write this. This deserves its own thread.

[kd88]

Yes, well I've been working on this for several years now. I began by learning to use the Edison equipment. (Standard D, the simple 1905 recorder.) Not only all acoustic, but no electricity. Can work quite well, but temperature of medium and equipment is important. Teaches you to speak the language clearly, as if you were addressing the multitude.

But then I morphed into motorizing the Edison equipment, electrifying the cutter (making a few styles -both peizo and magnetic- of my own), and, most recently, making my own wax.

Just in the past month, I got one of those little Gakken 'Berliner-style phonograph science toys'. In an effort to actually get a sound out of it, I got the notion to make my own wax blank using a paper disc, dipping it into the wax formula that I extrapolated from what I could find of Edison formulae -others are doing this better than I - ...

And to my amazement, all of these things have worked.

I think the paradigm (or goal) that is emerging in my head is the creation of sound recorders with off the shelf materials. (And again, I hasten to point out that it's been done - even by others here on this forum!)

I feel a bit like Richard Dreyfus' character in "close Encounters", though. This has been my mashed potato mountain.

(BTW- I'm very happy with the waxed plates on the Recordio, too.)

Parts from the 'science toy' can certainly be made to work in a more serious lateral cut acoustic disc lathe.

Finally, while you won't be able to play a wax master on your Brunswick Ultona (enviable equipment!), elsewhere on this site is the key to making a playable, acoustically recorded disc with perhaps enough resilience to withstand the handcranker: the woman who tells you how to 'pirate' a vinyl record with Spread-On's Oomoo 30 (or 25 if you're quick), and Task 4.

To recap her idea: Build a glass-bottom water-tight box. Put your wax master -or lacquer- in the bottom. Pour on the Oomoo. Let it set up, cure. Remove from master. Pour in the plastic (could be Task 4, but could be some other casting resin) and there you are...

I'll let you all know how I do.

As I am doing at the moment.

[Perisphere]

Those early inside-start Pathe discs were vertical cut, not lateral. I won one of them from a Nauction four years ago, a 14" item. Plays on the dot at 90 RPM.

[JayDC]

Finally, while you won't be able to play a wax master on your Brunswick Ultona (enviable equipment!), elsewhere on this site is the key to making a playable, acoustically recorded disc with perhaps enough resilience to withstand the handcranker: the woman who tells you how to 'pirate' a vinyl record with Spread-On's Oomoo 30 (or 25 if you're quick), and Task 4.

To recap her idea: Build a glass-bottom water-tight box. Put your wax master -or lacquer- in the bottom. Pour on the Oomoo. Let it set up, cure. Remove from master. Pour in the plastic (could be Task 4, but could be some other casting resin) and there you are...

I'll let you all know how I do.

As I am doing at the moment.

I'm very interested in this Idea, since this is sort of a DIY pressing plant in your basement. If I remember Mr. Wizard from my earlier years, electro plating isn't that complicated either. Something like a penny and a nickle are placed in a bath of vinegar, and electrofide, the nickle will turn copperish in color, and the penny will be nickle plated. All done with a 6volt lantern battery.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electroplate

I guess if your into somewhat harsh chemicals, you could go to a photo shop, or camera store and purchase some silver nitrate ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_nitrate ). They use that sometime in photography and botnay. I think you may need a bath of stannous chloride ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin(II)_chloride ) before the silver, but I'm not sure of the availabilty of this chemical to the average joe. Then just electro nickle plate the silver coated plastic disc made from the wax, peel apart.. and build a small hand fed, and powered press ( [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Record_press[/ur] ).. My wet dream come true..

[emorritt]

You're right that although Edison made commercial recorders for consumers to use, they were nothing like the recorders used in his studio. Studio recorders were made many different ways, some with compound diaphragms (i.e. more than one material used for the same vibrating element), usually the diaphragm assembly rode on circular knife edges machined into the housing, and not a rubber gasket like the home setup, and the styluses were sometimes mounted on thin springs, including many other variations.

As far as disc recorders go, I know that Victor employed three brothers by the surname of Sooey (sp?), Harry, Charlie, and Ray. The eldest taught the art to the younger two, and each made their own alterations to the design. Most disc setups used glass or copper diaphragms, but like Edison's recorders, I'm sure there were different materials used for the vibrating element. Also, the type of performance being recorded determined what type of recorder was used, as well as size and shape of recording horn. Horns were always tapering in general shape, however there were variations in the way the sides were formed. Some were octagonal, some square, some a perfect cone, etc. It made a difference in how a particular sound recorded.

Acoustic recording was really a 'black art' of sorts, and some things worked better than others. Once a studio had someone who could make good recorders and consequently good records, they never let anyone sit in the machine room while a recording was being made. If the engineer had to take a bathroom break, the cutting assembly was dismounted from the lathe and taken with him. Recording secrets were very highly guarded since it was difficult to design effective technology in those days.

[emorritt]

I've done this before with a product called Castolite. They have several types of resins and molding compounds that go by the brand name CastoMold. This works fairly well with 78 size grooves, but I doubt the molding compound would not have enough resolution to do LP size grooves.

[JayDC]

You could sub the plastic record/wax method with an acetate laquer. Then it would be the same as a factory, but in your basement.

Had anyone tried to design a small vinyl press machine? I think there would be a tight niche market for such a device, if it was affordable. Especially if there was simple process to make the stampers. I think the hardest part of the process is finding the center hole in the stampers. With modern computer technology, maybe something can be done about this.

I know in the print world, everything change when paper plates came out. The old process involved developing a plate with chemicals and special equipment. When the new process came about, all you needed was the paper plates, and a laser printer. The paper plates didn't last as long as the metal ones, but where easier and cheaper to make, so it evened out. The graphical quality of the paper plates also surpased it's metal elders do to advances in computer printing resolutions. Metal Plates where stuck to halftones, and the limits of the camera gear needed to make the film for the metal plates.

This is realy chicken before egg stuff. Printing presses inspired computer printers, that redefined the printing industry.

I wonder if a similar systems could be thought up for pressing vinyl. Somewhat of a card stock stamper from a large format laser printer. Won't last very long, but you could make a bunch of stampers, and replace them as they wore out. This could also bypass lathe cutting (oh no!), but the upside is that we may beable to remove limits at are imposed by this system.

You could make 7" plate easily on a home laser printer, on regular paper.
10",12" would need a large format printer.

But how do you make a virtual record negitive in a computer to print out?. Anyone here a computer programmer?

Whoa.. Welcome to the age of the digital record.

[kd88]

Edison...studio recorders were made many different ways, some with compound diaphragms (i.e. more than one material used for the same vibrating element), usually the diaphragm assembly rode on circular knife edges machined into the housing, and not a rubber gasket like the home setup, and the styluses were sometimes mounted on thin springs...

This is far more info than I've ever been able to unearth!

Acoustic recording was really a 'black art' of sorts...Recording secrets were very highly guarded...

And I have no doubt that this is why! I'd be very interested in knowing more, knowing your source for this info, etc.

But in practical terms, plastics (and other materials) have come a very long way since the turn of the 20th century. We have available to us materials and knowledge that makes the pursuit of a black art almost too easy. Even the science toy phonograph shows you how to make a decent injection molded diaphragm that is more resilient and generates more groove excursion per 'yell-o-watt' than Miller could have imagined possible. Tear apart a neoprene speaker...and there you are! On the way to creating an recording rig. Lateral, vertical...get out your hand tools and start prototying! (Keep in mind that it's been done...and that you're up against the cussedness of things.)

I have high hopes for the plastics and silicones from Smooth-On. The site by Anna S. (http://gadgets.qj.net/How-to-Pirate-a-Vinyl-Record/pg/49/aid/39381) clearly shows her copying a microgroove product. She does not say how it sounds, if playable, etc. Perhaps because she used the word 'pirate' in her article, the responses were a howl against piracy. Others noted that the dub to computer would be an easier way to 'pirate' an lp. (This gets a big grin from me. ) Nobody seems to have actually tried it. And I fully intend to. I'll be copying a WAX recording made at 78 rpm on a Recordio, of my voice saying something stupid into a crystal mic. I will be ducking the piracy issue completely, and I won't be rushing off to file a process patent!

I worked on blank making yesterday. I had a free afternoon, so I heated up my double boiler and melted some of my 'old Edison formula': which is very roughly a pound of stearic, a quarter pound each of various other waxes, a dash of lye, and a dash of vybar. I managed to get some condensate (water) into the wax. This took quite a bit of extra time to resolve. I ended up filtering the wax many times in a cheesecloth filter I rigged up. Then I found out that my table is not level and got a funky uneven blank. I cut it anyway. I got fairly good results, but the uneveness caused trouble. I dubbed (pirated!) my trial to computer and melted it down again. (Can't do this with a lacquer!) This time, I leveled my surface before pouring. I let it set up over night. Today, the plate of wax looks good...now all I have to do is try a cut. Stay tuned...

(This is sorta off topic, I realize, even though I'm working with acoustic period materials. Whatcha say Steve? Should we devote a topic to what Flo calls 'bricolage' -and others might call 'art school' projects? So long as we stick to lathes and not drift off into etc.?)

[Steve E.]

Had anyone tried to design a small vinyl press machine? I think there would be a tight niche market for such a device, if it was affordable.

Damn straight! Sign me up for one!!

[JayDC]

mee too.. hehe


The press would be easy to make, the process of plating in a safe way, in your home, a bit more puzzling.. Sorry my spelling is crap, but I swear I'm a genius..

I'm talking to couple people about this now, a programmer, and my friends dad thats a senior engineer at N.A.B. in DC..

Sorry for hijacking the thread, I'll shut-up now.. Guy please let us know how the "pirating" of the wax works.. I'm interested, since this could allow me to produce one or 2 plastic records from my acetates.. Great for the DJ battle..