[78-L] Damage Control on Acoustic 78s?

[David Lennick]

Trying to remember which one I borrowed from Graham Newton to sample a few 
Victor pre-grooved discs (I have several HUNDRED of the things and I need to 
get something just to find out whether I want to keep them). Had to be a 4.5 or 
5.0 mil. The 4.0 mil was the only tip that would play the Mae Questel Deccas 
without audible mistracking.

I have a "Pathe Needle" in my Brunswick machine which I've never used (and if 
anyone within travelling distance of Toronto is interested, the machine is for 
sale, $400 cash and carry, as is an Edison "Adam" for $500, must be off the 
premises by March 28th..the Edison includes an adapter to play laterals). 
Pathes play just fine with the 2.1 truncated elliptical, oddly enough..I've 
never had one mistrack with it.

dl

neechevoneeznayou at gmail.com wrote:
> What is the largest stylus you have used, David?
> 
> And what would be the largest one might imagine using, most extreme 
> case? Like for Victor home recordings or such...and Pathes that have a 
> wide but shallow groove?
> 
> Size really does matter here.
> 
> joe salerno
> 
> 
> David Lennick wrote:
>> You'll get answers from professionals on this list and from music lovers (not 
>> always the same people). First of all, are you planning on playing these 
>> records on modern equipment or on classic antique phonographs? Lots of 
>> differences. Modern equipment involves new styli, not the old flipovers from 
>> the changers of the 50s and 60s, which never properly fitted the grooves of old 
>> 78s anyway. And modern equipment means you're just wasting your time unless you 
>> also clean the records with professional equipment such as the Monks (and its 
>> recommended solutions) or the Disc Doctor's solutions and brushes, since modern 
>> cartridges and styli track at lighter weights. Acoustic records were meant to 
>> take the heavy soundboxes and steel needles (as long as you changed them and 
>> kept the phonograph in good working order) and you'll probably have noticed 
>> that many acoustic records turn up 85+ years later in nice condition.
>>
>> I transfer 78s professionally and use both Stanton and Shure cartridges and a 
>> variety of styli, from 2.1 truncated elliptical through 2.5 elliptical and on 
>> to 2.8 elliptical and larger tips if required. Not long ago I tried everything 
>> on some mid 30s US Deccas and found nothing would work but a 4 mil stylus.
>>
>> dl
>>
>> beststuff4u at frontiernet.net wrote:
>>> They say ignorance is bliss, so that would make me extremely blissful.
>>>
>>> All these years I played 78s without recognition that there were factors under my control that could either cause or avoid damage to my records. The worst I ever experienced was poor sounding music. Now that I am aware of the possibilities of certain damage factors, I need to understand how to detect them before any damage is done. I'm preparing to make some equipment changes as well as to start listening to my most treasured acoustics that I have not played in many years. Until now I've only been playing electric 78s.
>>>
>>> The factors I am concerned about are:
>>>
>>> 1. Wrong stylus size.
>>> 2. Wrong stylus shape (i.e. conical, elliptical, truncated elliptical,etc.)
>>> 3. Improper tracking pressure.
>>> 4. Mismatch of cartridge to tonearm (tonearm weight and cartridge compliance).
>>>
>>> Rather than learn thru trial and error and ruin my acoustics, I am hoping that the esteemed members of this list can answer some very elementary questions.
>>>
>>> 1. For the four concerns listed above, how do damage potentials present themselves? Visual? Audio? Other? 
>>> 2. I often read about "mistracking" as a potential to destroy a record in short order. How is mistracking recognized?
>>>
>>> Thank you for any help in getting me out of my blissful (i.e. ignorant) state.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> ____________________