The talking machine world (Jan-Dec 1906)

6 THE TALKING MACHINE WORLD. PRACTICAL SUGGESTIONS AND COMMENTS. REGARDING INTRODUCTORY SPEECH. J. H. Lepper, talking machine dealer of Mason City, la., writes as follows: "1 would like to hear from talking machine dealers of the United States, through The Talking Machine World, if they favor having the announcements on the records as now used on the Edison and other records? For my part I would much prefer that they cast them out. I always set the reproducer down on the record as nearly the beginning of the record proper as possible, but i am not always able to strike it right, and then it sounds worse than if I had let it play the introduction speech. It seems to me as long as the record has the label on the end, or as, with the disc records, printed in the center, it is sufficient. Let us hear from you and settle this matter." ABOUT SPEECH REGULATION. F. M. Barney, of Elm Creek, Neb., writes The World as follows: "It may be of interest to your readers to learn of my speed method. I have long asked the Edison people to put out a record with a given note on same that might be used in iinison to a key pipe to obtain correct speed, and in record No. 9241, 'Dixie Rube,' they have given a standard tone A. I have a tuning reed A. I put said record on my machines (am a dealer) and note difference in tone on record and reed. If the tone A on record is high I lower speed of machine till in unison. This is but an instant's work, and the speed is correct. This gives the natural tone of "oices, etc. I do not think much of Edison marks on back of machine for speed regulation; it takes forever, and is not perfect. TO MAKE MACHINES LOUDER. "To your readers who would like to make their machines louder, I give the following method, which gives perfect results: Remove vibrating arm (in which jewel is set) and take it to your jeweler and have another hole drilled in same as near the former hole (in center of arm) as possible on the side in which the jewel is set. Put screw through this hole after replacing link. This causes the amplitude of vibration of diaphragm to be increased, thereby increasing loudness of tone. I have heated the arm and pushed jewel closer to the old hole with equally good results, but like former method better, as it can be changed hack readily." THE CAUSE OF THE "BLAST." "I disagree with Mr. Seymour, London, Eng., to the statement he makes that blast is always a defect of the record for which the reproducer is not in the least responsible. I have found that where a diaphragm is too slow, it will cause the jewel to leave the track of the record and produce a blast also. This is the case when the speed of the return vibration of the diaphragm ii3 not sufficient to hold jewel to the record; in effect it's the same as the track broken in the record." TONE QUALITY IN DISC RECORDS. Wm. F. Hunt, the progressive dealer, and always interesting writer, of Wanatah, Ind., says: "In the 'Practical Suggestions and Comments' column of the March issue of The World, T. Willson, of York, England, gives it as his opinion that the announcement in disc records answers a very good purpose owing to the record first wearing out and becoming scratchy at that point. Otherwise the selection proper would suffer, he claims. I fail to understand why it should be necessary to use an announcement to overcome this evil. Why not, in recording, permit the recording stylus to make a few circles on the record before the selection is started, and then in reproducing utilize these unrecorded lines for the purpose of getting the needle and record adapted to each other, or, for the wearing out purpose, as our friend puts it. It would not be near so disagreeable to hear the scratching alone as to have it intermingled with the voice of the announcer. Furthermore, he suggests that the larger discs be recorded at a lower rate of speed, so as to permit of a lOnger selection to be recorded on them. Or, in other words, to equalize the surface speed of the larger records with that of the 7-inch size. Our English friend seems to prefer quantity rather than quality. He does not appear to understand that the greater the surface speed of a record, the fuller and truer the tone quality. The making of the larger discs is not mainly to get a longer selection (although the selection is materially lengthened thereby), but to get better results, which point is, after all, most essential. This same correspondent also wrongfully states that too large a circle is left blank in the center of the large discs, that they could be run equally as near the center as a 7-inch disc and with as good results. Here he again shows lack of knowledge in the principle of sound-recording. He is smply trying to increase a fault in the disc records. And with his idea of recording the larger discs at a lower rate of speed the fault would even be doubly increased. As I have already stated, the greater the surface speed of a record, the fuller the tone of the reproduction. Now, then, to illustrate, when the recording stylus starts in at the outer edge of the record, the surface speed is at its greatest point, but as the circles near the center they gradually grow shorter, and the stylus covers less space in a given time, therefore cutting the sound waves shorter and shorter. Naturally, the selection in the reproducing process deteriorates in tone as the needle nears the center of the record, and the nearer the center the selection is recorded, the greater the deterioration in tone. The difference in tone quality from the outer edge of a 12-inch or even a 10inch record to a point equal near the center to that of the present 7-inch record would be greater than the difference from the outer edge of a 7-inch disc to its inner circle. In the present average disc record the circles on the inner edge of the record are less than half as long as the outer circle, yet the deterioration is so gradual that it is, if any, but very little noticed. The manufacturers of the disc records are using the very best judgment in the making of them. They are giving the greatest quantity of music on a record consistent with good quality. We have had low-speed records, and from experience it has proven that the general talking machine buying public prefer the better quality of reproduction which can mainly be attained by a highspeed record. Of course people who do not keep their machines running at the proper speed cannot realize the advantage in this method, as they do not get a natural reproduction at any rate. The making of longer selections is a more perplexing problem than the average person can comprehend." MATERIAL FOR DIAPHRAGMS. In regard to Mr. Seymour's article in last month's issue on material for diaphragms, Wm. F. Hunt, of Wanatah, Ind., writes: "I wish to say that some of his arguments appear to be practical as well as logical. He, however, takes the opposite stand to Arthur C. Mestraud as to what causes blasts in a cylinder record. The correspondent to which Mr. Seymour has reference is my humble self, and I must acknowledge that he has quite convinced me that my views on the subject to some extent were wrong, most especially in that a more porous substance would have to be used for diaphragms to secure the mellow effect. In his claiming that this can be brought about by the use of larger diaphragms, I believe to be quite true, as I find that even in the reproducer of the Columbia Co.'s 20th Century graphophone, which has a diaphragm of four inches in diameter, with its tremendous volume, the tone quality is most mellow. It will, however, be found that the smaller diaphragms produce a much sweeter tone. The one is natural in its sweetness, while the other is natural in its mellowness, and the secret lies in combining the two into one reproducer. It will have to be contended that one effect without the other is unnatural, and I still believe that some now unknown substance will have to be used in diaphragm construction before perfection in tone is reached. It is now being tried to overcome these defects in recording, and while to some extent the method is a success, yet, the tone is deadened to a considerable degree in this process. I do not wish it understood chat I do not appreciate the advancements made in the art of sound recording and reproduction, for I think them really marvelous, but it must be admitted that perfection is yet out of the question. Time alone will bring about the desired results." TALKING MACHINE NOMENCLATURE. A subscriber of The Talking Machine World calls our attention to an article which recently appeared in a London paper, called "The Bazaar," and which has been reproduced in some other publications, treating of the nomenclature and early history of the talking machine, and says: "Therein you find mentioned that the United States Patent Office calls all talking machines 'gramaphones,' whatever other names makers may give them," and asks for information as to whether this is so. Before going into this matter it will be best to quote the story referred to: "The gramophone was invented by a Mr. H. E. Berliner, of Washington, to illustrate the practical use of Professor Bell's discovery that the vibrations caused by any series of sounds could be 'written' by a vibrating point on a suitable material, and the same series of sounds reproduced by another point traveling over the inscription so made. It was one step in a long series of investigations resulting from a consideration of the properties of telephone invented by Professor Bell, and this gramophone — socalled from 'gramma,' a letter, and phone, sound — consisted of a flat disc revolving horizontally, and bearing on its surface the inscription impressed by the vibrating point. It had previously been discovered that a cylinder revolving on a spindle could take on the inscriptions, and that from these inscriptions the sounds could be reproduced by causing another point to travel along the engraved cylinder while the latter revolved on its spindle under the point. This primitive form of machine, the notion of Bell and Edison, was called a phonograph, from phone, sound, and graph, I write. But all the machines distinguished in England as graphophones, phonographs and gramophones are called in the United States Patent Office gramophones, whatever other names makers may give them. The difference is not in the principle involved in the reproductions, but in the mechanism employed. In connection with the above the Columbia Phonograph Co. writes to our contemporary to the effect that every talking machine now makes its records by engraving sound waves in a wax composition. This was first made known to the world by the inventors of the gramophone. The phonograph was a machine that indented its records on metal foil. The gramophone etched its records in an acid bath. But the true phonograph or the true gramophone no longer exists, except as a curiosity. Every successful talking machine to-day employs the gramophone process of engraving records, and is therefore, strictly speaking, a graphophone." THE EDITOR'S COMMENTS. Without commenting at length on the above article, which is open to correction in some respects, we are authoritatively informed that the word gramophone first used by Emil Berliner in connection with his patent, is not employed generically by the United States Patent Office as a classifying term for talking or sound reproducing devices. It is specifically applied, however, to describe appliances of a particular type. The practice followed by the patent examiners being to class all apparatus for making records by the indenting method as phonographs, by the cutting or undulating method as graphophones, and by the lateral or zig-zag process for disc records as gramophones. These designations were adopted by the United States Patent Office early In the