Few people made acoustical recordings that were worse than Edison's, and absolutely nobody made them that were better. Though their quality varies, at their best, Edison recordings were breathtaking.
Cylinders were made til 1929. And we're hard to recreate. But the diamond disc is the king of the gramophones. You can play 78s on a Edison. You just need a different add on to play em
Thank you Shawn Bori thank you. I've always admired you and your work. I've always wondered how come I have Columbia fox trots from the early 1920s on Columbia cylinders yet everyone says Columbia ceased years before? The fire in 1922 makes sense since it's that time period onwards I ve seen nothing but Edison. The Albany /Columbia's are direct recordings I believe not dubbed like Edison.
the needle on a diamond disc is a real diamond, rather than the near bent nail on regular 78s. The weight of the needle on the record is probably a tenth of the weight that a Victor out on one.. The noise was just the surface noise that cursed many Edison records due to the materials used. They did get a little better in the 20s. On the Edison machine, the tonearm is supported by a feedscrew underneath that drives the needle across the record with minimal weight. On a regular 78, the sixty or so ounces of needle pressure are Dragged across the record by the depth of the grooves. Many popular 78s we encounter today have been played to death after fifty or so playings, and there is almost no sound on them. Except for mishandling and sloppy storage, most Edison discs sound like new.
@@jeeprod1 Yeah i know, the 78's tracking force is unbelievable and thats why i bought a Ortofon 2M 78 needle made for 78's but with a tracking force of only 1.6 to 2 grams so i think atleast my 78's are safe. They still sound beautiful. Thanks for the explanation.
Unfortunately, that low surface noise attribute only applied for the earliest Diamond Discs. These utilized a celluloid surface just as Blue and Royal Purple Amberol cylinders did. A problem soon emerged; that of the celluloid surface becoming detached from its base. From then on, subsequent releases were pressed on solid Bakelite, the quality of which dropped significantly during WWI.
The first EDISON Diamond Disc were Record`s! But they were made of wood flour and Resin and had etched labels, And when they got wet! They would split around the edges and split into the Grooves, And the Surface was NOT AT ALL Of good quality! Lots of hiss and static! Even when new! In fact Edison Dubbed His Blue Amberol Records using the Disc To Cylinder Acoustical method! (Horn To Horn!) When Playing a Blue Amberol at that time, You hear the 160 RPM Surface sound, Then before the Music A Audible 80 RPM Hiss! Then in around 1919 the Company used a Much better Clay material with Bakelite and resin and used the first Black with white print record labels! These Were so Much better, He then called them Re Creation Records! Then He went to the most Famous Label the one You have shown! Then in late 1922 Re Creation was replaced with Record!
The early DDs, and their fatal susceptibility to moisture, are well known. But the earliest 'transfer' discs, particularly from 1914-15, if found in good condition, have very quiet surfaces. It was the later, wartime pressings that turn many collectors off from the 'black' label discs in general.
Lucius1958 The very first Diamond Discs had a celluloid surface, the same material as used for Blue Amberols. They had remarkably low surface noise. It is a shame that this feature wasn't retained and a better core developed. Columbia records developed this idea further and in the mid-twenties released all their records using their patented ’silent surface’ laminated technique. The improvement is noticeable even when such a record was played an acoustic machine. Even more so when played on modern equipment.
@@HMV101 In Redondo Beach, around 1970, we visited an antique store - they had A PILE ( about 10 of them?) of Edison records, one-fourth of an inch thick, no, I didn't buy any or look them over (one-sided)? Are they getting more and more rare today?
Bobby Francis As each year passes there are bound to be less Edison records in existence. That, due to the laws of entropy (now that's a good, but very sad word🤔) applies to everything ever made. By extension, this means that they are getting ’rarer’. However, ’rare’ doesn't always mean more valuable. ’Value’ of course, depends on the number of people who want to own an item and this varies greatly from one era to the next. It does not necessarily increase with the years but can stay level or even decrease once the ’fad’ for an item settles down. (Ask anyone who invested heavily in vintage Teddy Bears in the 1980s how much they are now worth now. Usually less.) Of course you probably already knew (or didn't want to know) all that. So the short answer I suppose, check out the average price they actually go (not ask for) for Edison Diamond Discs on eBay.
It always amazes me how so-called "experts" give totally wrong information that is then difficult to convince the layman is incorrect. The chequered pattern at the perimeter of the Edison label is definitely NOT a stroboscope indicating 80rpm -- it is decoration ONLY.
@@frankprovasek5394 It is well-known amongst knowledgeable collectors that the border around Edison labels is a decoration pattern and definitely not a stroboscope. One only has to set the speed according to this to hear how wrong is the assumption, which is not exclusive to this Edison Tech Center guy. I am amazed that someone representing General Electric and consequently Edison has fallen into this trap.
if Columbia stopped producing cylinders around 1910. Oh my, how can I have "Whispering" "Hindustan" "Rose Of Washington Square " all fox trots on cylinders but recoded by Columbia. did they record them them in 1910 knowing they'd be hits 10 to 11 years later then released them in 1920, 21.. no I've proven time and again Columbia didn't stop making cylinders till around 1922..
+Theodore Novak Columbia themselves did not produce cylinders much past 1910, however The Albany indestructible company (which started producing cylinders of celluloid in 1907) , in 1908 had a contract with Columbia who purchased there product line, and Albany produced the cylinders, and yes they were labeled Columbia indestructible records, Albany was located at 236 Hamilton street in Albany, New York and produced the celluloid cylinders until a factory fire burned it in 1922.
Sergio Bolaños/Sergiob466 Of course you CAN ’put a modern record on ’Edison’s record player’. You will find that it fits perfectly. Just don't try and play it that's all 😉. You can, however, play normal shellac 78rpm record on any Edison Diamond Disc Phonograph if the original diamond head is removed and replaced with a 78 adaptor head. Most of these third-party aftermarket accessories were also capable of playing Pathé style, vertically modulated discs.
Few people made acoustical recordings that were worse than Edison's, and absolutely nobody made them that were better. Though their quality varies, at their best, Edison recordings were breathtaking.
Cylinders were made til 1929. And we're hard to recreate. But the diamond disc is the king of the gramophones. You can play 78s on a Edison. You just need a different add on to play em
What add the on do you need?
@@Vanya2519 different stylus. The stylus on this pickup is not compatible with 78s. The grooves on 78s is different than Edison discs.
Edison Diamond disc phonographs were not gramophones. Gramophones are only machines that are european or under the Emilie Berliner patents
Edison was the first audiophile.
Thank you Shawn Bori thank you. I've always admired you and your work. I've always wondered how come I have Columbia fox trots from the early 1920s on Columbia cylinders yet everyone says Columbia ceased years before? The fire in 1922 makes sense since it's that time period onwards I ve seen nothing but Edison. The Albany /Columbia's are direct recordings I believe not dubbed like Edison.
i have one of the edison records with the william tell overture on it
Sounds like its carving a new groove while playing hehe nice vid thanks for sharing :)
the needle on a diamond disc is a real diamond, rather than the near bent nail on regular 78s. The weight of the needle on the record is probably a tenth of the weight that a Victor out on one.. The noise was just the surface noise that cursed many Edison records due to the materials used. They did get a little better in the 20s. On the Edison machine, the tonearm is supported by a feedscrew underneath that drives the needle across the record with minimal weight. On a regular 78, the sixty or so ounces of needle pressure are Dragged across the record by the depth of the grooves. Many popular 78s we encounter today have been played to death after fifty or so playings, and there is almost no sound on them. Except for mishandling and sloppy storage, most Edison discs sound like new.
@@jeeprod1 Yeah i know, the 78's tracking force is unbelievable and thats why i bought a Ortofon 2M 78 needle made for 78's but with a tracking force of only 1.6 to 2 grams so i think atleast my 78's are safe. They still sound beautiful. Thanks for the explanation.
Lol, Easter egg! for a split second between 2:18 and 2:19 there's an image that says 'Faraday's law of induction'
its creepy
I've heard that the very earliest pressings are the ones that sound best and have virtually no surface noise.
Unfortunately, that low surface noise attribute only applied for the earliest Diamond Discs. These utilized a celluloid surface just as Blue and Royal Purple Amberol cylinders did.
A problem soon emerged; that of the celluloid surface becoming detached from its base. From then on, subsequent releases were pressed on solid Bakelite, the quality of which dropped significantly during WWI.
What do you mean "By 1910...Edison was pretty much the only...company around selling cylinders"? What about U.S. Everlasting? Indestructible??
why is there a single frame of a Mime at 2:19?
I think it says "Faraday's Proof Of Induction".
No doubt! Lol I kept rewinding it to make sure I wasn't nuts!
The first EDISON Diamond Disc were Record`s! But they were made of wood flour and Resin and had etched labels, And when they got wet! They would split around the edges and split into the Grooves, And the Surface was NOT AT ALL Of good quality! Lots of hiss and static! Even when new! In fact Edison Dubbed His Blue Amberol Records using the Disc To Cylinder Acoustical method! (Horn To Horn!) When Playing a Blue Amberol at that time, You hear the 160 RPM Surface sound, Then before the Music A Audible 80 RPM Hiss! Then in around 1919 the Company used a Much better Clay material with Bakelite and resin and used the first Black with white print record labels! These Were so Much better, He then called them Re Creation Records! Then He went to the most Famous Label the one You have shown! Then in late 1922 Re Creation was replaced with Record!
The early DDs, and their fatal susceptibility to moisture, are well known. But the earliest 'transfer' discs, particularly from 1914-15, if found in good condition, have very quiet surfaces. It was the later, wartime pressings that turn many collectors off from the 'black' label discs in general.
Lucius1958
The very first Diamond Discs had a celluloid surface, the same material as used for Blue Amberols. They had remarkably low surface noise. It is a shame that this feature wasn't retained and a better core developed.
Columbia records developed this idea further and in the mid-twenties released all their records using their patented ’silent surface’ laminated technique. The improvement is noticeable even when such a record was played an acoustic machine. Even more so when played on modern equipment.
A Jewel, what's the weight of the needl?
The Edison discs are thicker than a standard 78 rpm record. Also I think they are one-sided.
Edison discs are also two sided. I just acquired my first S19 and was super excited to play some Diamond Discs we had in our storage. BEAUTIFUL! :-)
They were pressed on ’Condensite’ (identical to Bakelite), ¼ inch thick, weighed 6-ounces. A single-sided Edison disc would be a VERY rare exception.
@@HMV101 In Redondo Beach, around 1970, we visited an antique store - they had A PILE ( about 10 of them?) of Edison records, one-fourth of an inch thick, no, I didn't buy any or look them over (one-sided)? Are they getting more and more rare today?
Bobby Francis
As each year passes there are bound to be less Edison records in existence.
That, due to the laws of entropy (now that's a good, but very sad word🤔) applies to everything ever made.
By extension, this means that they are getting ’rarer’. However, ’rare’ doesn't always mean more valuable. ’Value’ of course, depends on the number of people who want to own an item and this varies greatly from one era to the next. It does not necessarily increase with the years but can stay level or even decrease once the ’fad’ for an item settles down. (Ask anyone who invested heavily in vintage Teddy Bears in the 1980s how much they are now worth now. Usually less.)
Of course you probably already knew (or didn't want to know) all that.
So the short answer I suppose, check out the average price they actually go (not ask for) for Edison Diamond Discs on eBay.
It always amazes me how so-called "experts" give totally wrong information that is then difficult to convince the layman is incorrect. The chequered pattern at the perimeter of the Edison label is definitely NOT a stroboscope indicating 80rpm -- it is decoration ONLY.
So the guy at the Edison Tech Center, operated by General Electric, which was founded by Thomas Edison, is a "so-called expert"?
@@frankprovasek5394
It is well-known amongst knowledgeable collectors that the border around Edison labels is a decoration pattern and definitely not a stroboscope. One only has to set the speed according to this to hear how wrong is the assumption, which is not exclusive to this Edison Tech Center guy. I am amazed that someone representing General Electric and consequently Edison has fallen into this trap.
Amazing
The tone arm is driven across the record by a WHAT? A Feed...... ???
It is driven by a feedscrew
if Columbia stopped producing cylinders around 1910. Oh my, how can I have "Whispering" "Hindustan" "Rose Of Washington Square " all fox trots on cylinders but recoded by Columbia. did they record them them in 1910 knowing they'd be hits 10 to 11 years later then released them in 1920, 21.. no I've proven time and again Columbia didn't stop making cylinders till around 1922..
+Theodore Novak Columbia themselves did not produce cylinders much past 1910, however The Albany indestructible company (which started producing cylinders of celluloid in 1907) , in 1908 had a contract with Columbia who purchased there product line, and Albany produced the cylinders, and yes they were labeled Columbia indestructible records, Albany was located at 236 Hamilton street in Albany, New York and produced the celluloid cylinders until a factory fire burned it in 1922.
Careful Teddy your ign0rance is showing
It's no SL-1200 but pretty cool none the less.
What's that for a frame? ruclips.net/video/9ENJY3geCFQ/видео.html
I have one of them records
Cool
Can you put a modern record on Edison's record player
Definitely not! You'll destroy it!
Sergio Bolaños/Sergiob466
Of course you CAN ’put a modern record on ’Edison’s record player’.
You will find that it fits perfectly.
Just don't try and play it that's all 😉.
You can, however, play normal shellac 78rpm record on any Edison Diamond Disc Phonograph if the original diamond head is removed and replaced with a 78 adaptor head.
Most of these third-party aftermarket accessories were also capable of playing Pathé style, vertically modulated discs.
2:19
WOW
. . .
the record will break due to the diamond disc having different grooves
It's hard to understand you at some points. You're speaking too fast and you swallow your words. Otherwise, it's great!
+DamonWakefield unfortunately also the filming is too fast at some points.... to much movement. :-(
DamonWakefield I understood him perfectly, so, I don't understand how you could you not understand what this man is saying.
Dario Witer
Same here. I am 80-years-old and almost as deaf as Edison was at that age. I didn't miss a word.