Automatic Record Changers: We used to like them

You can support this channel on Patreon! Link below
Hmm. What were these things? Why were some record sets made to work with them? When did we decide we hated them? Was that the right call? Will I ask another question?
These are the things you’ll learn in this video, where we explore the humble record changer. Seriously. They didn’t suck!
If you’d like a more complete look at the Victor VE 10-50, you should take a look at these videos. Note that in the last link, the model shown is the premium 10-70 which included an electronic amplifier! Ooohh! The other two were Orthophonic Victrolas, which used an acoustic reproducer and a folded horn to achieve their surprisingly good fidelity.
• Video
• Victrola Orthophonic V...
• Video
Also, this site gives great info about Victrolas, and you should check them out!
www.victor-victrola.com/10-50.htm
How about some more links? I’ve got plenty!
Technology Connections on Twitter:
/ techconnectify
The TC Subreddit
/ technologyconnections
Technology Connections 2 (the channel where I sometimes talk about stuff and generally don’t prepare for anything):
/ @technologyconnextras
You can support this channel on Patreon! It has been amazing what Patreon has done for this channel, but also for me (your dorky host) personally. Through the support of people just like you, Technology Connections has become my job and I am so excited and thankful for it! If you’d like to join the fine folks in a pledge to help the channel grow, please check out my Patreon page. Thank you for your consideration!
/ technologyconnections
And thank you to the following patrons!
Trey Harris, Peter Pfundstein, Wilhelm Screamer, Mat Stu, Charlycobra, Thomas Kolanus, William Kisley, Daniel Johnson, Potch, Reemt Rühmkorf, Jack Nichol, Robin Rattay, Bruce Justyn, Rae McIntosh, Justin D, Adam Zawisza, LordJakson, Triancia, Max Barnash, Microfrost, MrSonicOSG, Sinirlan, rusty shakelford, Mitch Schenk, Juan Olivares, Andrei Alexandru Bleortu, Mike Bird, Emmett Ray, Michael Shaffer, Steve Trambert, Sputnik, Jason Spriggs, Danny S., Gregory Kumpula, Chris Zaremba, Tom Burns, Daniel Pf, Yung Kim, John W Campbell, Matthew Jones, Slappy826, Steven Ingles, Robert Howcroft, Troy King, Some Random, Peter Sarossy, Leigh Beattie, Tracy Cogsdill, Matt Allaire, Dave Mausner, Guy, John Hickey, Benjamin Gott, Luke, Rayne Luna, Zach Le, Fredrik Østrem, Greg Hodgdon, Anil Dash, Michael Wileczka, Chris Wolf, John Ehler, William Matthews, Fred Leckie, Julian Zielke, John Rogers, Kenneth Morenz, Andy, Greg Stearns, Zack, Robert L LaBelle, Chris Satterfield (Compgeke), Brian Johnson, Cameron Benton, Samuli Suomi, Keith McCready, Jeffrey Glover, John Marshall, Hsin-Kuei Chen, HenryD, Damian, David Anez, Josiah Keller, M T Bono, Conall Ó Maitiú, Struan Clark, Keeb, Tarrien, DrMoebyus, Biking With Panda, Chris Larsen, JH, Michael Romero, Jonathon Mah, Jonathan Polirer, Derek Nickel, Marc Versailles, Ian Pirner, Mark Stone, Arthur Zalevsky, John Fruetel, Jonathan Mayfield, Adam Veneziano, Christopher Swenson, Andrew Diamond, Cole Campbell, Christopher Beattie, Paul Bryan, Samuel Kirzner, Gus Polly, a ray, Daniel Pritchard, Brandon Tomlinson, Eric Loewenthal, Sebastian Stenner, Jeremy Samuels, Malcolm Miles, Matthew Lloyd, David L Jones, Matthew Burket, Mike Burns, Andrew Roland, Luke Whiting, John Cockerill, Smith8154, David Groover, Michael Wehner, Kyle Creasey, Rainbow Warrior, jacob kamphaus, Alex Hurley, Andrew Bobulsky, Matthew R, Richard Sams, Andy Kettu, On Ice Perspectives, Brian Wright, TheGreatCO, Marcus, Ethan R, Petteri Hjort, Daniel DeLage, Nathan Obuchowski, Sam Tran, Shaun Puzon, Bret Holmes, Vlycop, Alexandra Stanovska, Tom Ebenhoe, Casey Blackburn, Matthew Jensen, Devon Hodgson, Paul Macejewski, Case Tu'ikolovatu, Zimpan, Loïc Esch, Filmmaker IQ, Greg H, Lin Le, Ryan Blair, Jan Houben, Bren Ehnebuske, T.J. Zientek, AdamPlays, Vernon, Ton Brands, Scott Wright, Jason Ashcroft, Kory Howard, William Lahti, Thanasis Dimas, Marc Grondin, Lisa, Hex, Mark Stradling, Gareth Lucas, Anton Mironov, Robert West, Peter Sodke, joseph, Kristian Scheibe, Jacob, McLargehuge 510, Andrew, Nick, Ruxnor, Greg Tan, The Masterpiece, Sean, Chris Cody, Chad Fertig, Daniel Delaney, Greg Lindsey, Joseph Houghtaling, Ben Tucci, Seph P, Dave Stares, Josh Braun, Lachy Bell, Joe Johnson, Daniel Dugger, Nathan Back, Christopher Lowell, Oleg, PC Perspective, Howard Longden

[@raydunakin]

That "chastise audiophiles" check box literally made me laugh out loud!

[@sammy20024]

Plus the "Get On With It" right underneath! He struck comedy gold!

[@johanwilhelmsson1199]

"This website that I found" is subtle comedy gold.

[@BuzzLOLOL]

Still have my 1970 Garrard changer with synchronous motor, like a 120 volt electric clock uses, so that it always played the record at exactly the correct RPMs... It was also loosely built (compared to a German 'Dual' brand) so could cope better with records of slightly different thickness... (Never heard of a 'Glenburn')

[@JoshLederer]

BuzzLOLOL b vvvjjbjh

[@Awesome_Aasim]

[citation needed]

[@DoctorX17]

The man is a genius

[@ImDemonAlchemist]

​@@BuzzLOLOLWhy did you reply to this comment with that? Did you mean to?

[@whatthereq]

"I have heard both that they were cheap knockoffs and that they were better than your average BSR" Sounds like audiophiles arguing alright

[@miscbits6399]

they were both. These things weren't intended for hifi playing - more like playing "pop" records. They were notorious for skipping if you danced too hard (look at that springing mechanism) and the vertical tracking issue was minor compared to the angular tracking variation from outside to centre. They served a purpose, but it wasn't for "serious" listening. You tended to find them in "portable" players and "home entertainment centres" with cheap speakers (poor frequency response) and "ceramic cartridges" (high impedance, medicore frequency curve, high tracking weight) rather than "high fidelity" setups with decent speakers and moving magnet/moving coil cartridges

[@stevesstuff1450]

@@miscbits6399 : Except that this example was fitted with a Magnetic Cartridge - the Shure M75-6... ok, not "audiophile" grade, but still a fine cartridge that tracked at a mere 2gms, and still sounds pretty amazing today, when you consider it's near 50 year vintage! A great cartridge. I don't know the Glenburn name, but the deck itself has early 70s BSR heritage, and although they played a touch too fast, they were mechanically solid, and still work ridiculously well today, and sound very good too! They certainly could be, and were, used for "serious" listening. Oh, and as to that slightly faster thing.... I think you'll find that Rega "audiophile" turntables also run a touch fast (and I like Rega decks...very much), so really it doesn't matter....just helps make the music sound a little more 'exciting'..!

[@pjimmbojimmbo1990]

I had a BSR 510 in my Heathkit Compact. It wasn't too bad, had a tonearm that was balanced, then a tracking force was dialed in. Also has Anti Skate adjustment for both Conical and Elliptical Styli, and dampened Cue Lever. It came with the Shure M75 Cartridge, which I replaced with a Shure M91ED. It still works 47 yrs after I put the Kit together

[@frequentlycynical642]

Audiophiles never argued about BSR. They were universally despised, and for good reasons.

[@senorverde09]

@@stevesstuff1450 Basically the founder of BSR was kicked off his own board for being too old, went into retirement for a few years, and then started Glenburn.

[@nnnomenclature]

Can I just say I'm hard of hearing and the subtitles on your videos are always excellent (accurate, well timed) and I love the extra little jokes and things you put in during audio based sections. It gives your videos so much character and really gives the sense that you think about the experience of all your viewers. So thanks!

[@iamjamieq]

Did you see that ludicrous display last night? Brilliant little easter egg!

[@joeydurant6267]

I can't help but read subtitles or really anything... I soght read music so glancing at regular words is easy... But I had noticed that his subtitles are superbly placed and I'm very particular about that. Timing matters so much. If the text is in too big chunks it can ruin punchlines or surprises... If they are too late you're distracted from the action trying to read what happened a split second ago.... He has gotten the goldilocks zone for subtitles down to a science.

[@Videoneer]

"The Fu-" *cut* LMAO! Totally took me off guard, thank you.

[@Fetidaf]

Me too lmao legitimately laughed out loud

[@mykeprior3436]

Secret to humour is surprise

[@745morning]

@@mykeprior3436 so random does equal funny

[@uiopuiop3472]

i am not homeless thanks to god

[@Derpy-qg9hn]

@@745morning Carefully-applied random, yes.

[@SyntaxInflux]

That record drop at the end, amazing! Even if you wanted to time that it would be extremely difficult and I like you genuine reaction after the credits about it.

[@TheMonDon1721]

agreed!

[@taylorwoolston8856]

Trial and Error

[@Kalvinjj]

Quite a reward after all the mess with the Sunbeam toasters

[@EnygmaRecords]

I was wondering how many takes he had to do to get that timing right!

[@FiXato]

And I read your comment at just about the same time as it happened in the video. 🤣

[@michaeltaylors2456]

I feel like I’ve joined an elitist secret society .. I know the true nature of the term album

[@MrSonofsonof]

I'll let you into another secret that nobody else knows: the whale isn't really a fish.

[@StephenFasciani]

We're a club. We're a group. We can take a vote on issues. We can be a secret to society And no one else can join Unless they wear funny hats.

[@well_as_an_expert_id_say]

@@StephenFasciani I wear an ass as a hat, can I get in? (:

[@aaronryder4008]

I was thinking the same!

[@BradiKal61]

I feel old because Ive lived long enough that the term was in wide use when i was young

[@dcampagna1772]

One thing also about records - simply playing them a lot did more damage than anything the changer could do. The saying “I loved that record so much I wore it out,” was very much real, and it wasn’t a big deal to go to the record store and buy another one. A “fresh copy” of a favorite record was a nice treat.

[@EdgyShooter]

"The first record charger to really find a groove" I see what you did there ;D

[@Madness832]

And just before the that (~2:27): "...getting records to play upside-down." The inventor was from Australia. :D

[@re-agent9364]

I don't please explain

[@williamknight9379]

I specifically paused the video to come down and salute that pun

[@williamknight9379]

@@re-agent9364 records work by having 1 long groove in a tight spiral that covers the entire surface, they are played by a needle sitting in that groove and amplifying the ridges and valleys to make music

[@themilkmon]

Wow, that "drop" sync in the patreon part was on point.

[@pingumcping]

I thought it happened after the point had returned to it's resting place?

[@onyx8231]

it's been a real life _changer._ Video waiting to dr- _(*plop)_ -op.

[@Jaymac720]

"I don't know, Winnifred, this seems pretty complicated" Some of your lines make me laugh way more than they should

[@punzzle8213]

“…to really find a groove”. I love it.

[@nicholasragusano2284]

One thing you forgot to mention: many of the "Album" LP Stereo recordings had a safety feature. The edge and label areas were sightly raised so that the grooves did not actually come in contact with each other. While that left the records with only a small area of contact to rotate them, it seemed to work out fine. Because the arm and needle weight were set so light, there was very little drag and thus, the top record rotated just fine.

[@TuneStunnaMusic]

This was also needed when the records were pressed, because they are sent to a spindle in huge stacks after they come out of the press. I never understand why audiophiles say theyre worried about grooves touching when that cant actually happen.

[@JadeNeoma]

@@TuneStunnaMusic I suppose a big bit of grit could be large enough to get caught between the two and cause a scratch but I doubt this ever happened as long as you didn't store your discs in an insane way

[@polymetric2614]

"did they just suck at numbers in the 60s?" *label says 1974* took me multiple replays to get that

[@johnhpalmer6098]

Likely the LP seen was a reissue from 1974, even if it was initially issued in the 60's.

[@johnhpalmer6098]

@dandanthetaximan OK, I was wrong. Because he was talking about multiple LP sets of the 60's and not being familiar with this particular LP, I assumed it might've been a reissue, when in fact, it's a US pressing, not sure if original or not as London is used here in the US, Decca in most of Europe, thanks to Discogs, though it may still be a reissue, but a later issue, perhaps from the late 70's or early 80's, assuming it was issued that long.

[@lefunk22]

If you look carefully: "1974" actually pops up in small letters on screen near his face when he says that. So he clearly noticed the error after recording the video then added the pop-up graphics to appear at that moment, rather than doing a vocal re-dub or re-shooting video just for that one tiny moment.

[@KairuHakubi]

Man they sucked so much at numbers in the 60s they printed the wrong year!

[@K-o-R]

12:10 And just like that, I'm suddenly on The 8-Bit Guy's channel.

[@stevenjlovelace]

I'd love to see Anders Enger Jensen make some digitally smooth jazz.

[@MikeSharpeWriter]

Or Tech moan's channel!

[@RCAvhstape]

Who here does not subscribe to 8-bit and Techmoan? The internet is a big place, but sometimes it feels so small.

[@dominateeye]

Now we just need The Science Elf to make a Tech Connections reference and we'll have come full circle.

[@BigOlSmellyFlashlight]

@@dominateeye science elf..... oh my god

[@automatedelectronics6062]

The reason for the sequentially numbered records was not only for playing on a drop style record changer but also for the convenience of playing an entire album set on the radio. Back in the late 1960's, FM stereo radio became more common. Into the 1970's it was common for a radio station to play an entire album through. With single disc albums, to make a seamless transition from side one to side 2, you had to have 2 copies of the album. Most radio stations had 2 to 3 turntables and could have the next albums cued up in sequence. Well into the 1970's and even 1980's, most syndicated radio shows were on LP's, like the "Dr. Demento Show" and "American Top 40". The LP's were numbered so that side 1 would be on one LP and side 2 would be on the next LP, etc. These LP's were banded, so at the end of a section, the program would stop so you had time to insert your own commercial, station I.D., etc. While the inserted item played, you would cue up the next section in sequence. With the latest multi-disc albums, this convenience feature has been long forgotten. To pull off continuous seamless sequential play, now we record the albums digitally and play everything in sequence. You can also insert announcements at any point.

[@Jaymac720]

“Cheaper ineloquent hunks of ‘ok i guess’” is one of my favorite lines on this channel

[@lohphat]

Note that many LPs are thicker in the center label area AND at the edge. This reduced the probability for the grove areas to touch while stacked.

[@katho8472]

Plus air resistance/drag, which slows the record down before it hits the ground

[@esroberto1]

The raised label and edge areas were an RCA invention, referred to at the time as Gruv-Gard. The label areas of 45s (also an RCA invention) have always been thicker because they were initially designed to be stacked for play.

[@billymillions]

I came here to mention that. Also, on the 45s, some had ridges around the label to enhance friction and prevent records from sliding on each other on a changer. They didn't have larger edges though, like the LP often did.

[@K-o-R]

That thing dropping the records down the chute... AAAAAAHHHHHHH.

[@the_original_Bilb_Ono]

I have some of those 78rpm records from the 1920s. And they are heavy as hell for their size. I dropped one and it broke. It reminds me of when Tom and Jerry would hit each other with them.

[@kkonstantinosss2]

@Writer B.L. Alley Then you'll need a record player for your record player, and your record player for your record player will need another record player and the record player on your record player will need another disc and then another for your record player's record player.

[@Code7Unltd]

I don't know, I find the fragility of records to be quite "groovy" myself.

[@AriaPosting]

@@the_original_Bilb_Ono 78s are more brittle than normal records because they are made of shellac instead of vinyl. If you drop a normal lp they rarely break

[@the_original_Bilb_Ono]

@@AriaPosting yes, and I believe the shellac material was intentional for amps wasn't a thing yet, instead there was Victrolas with the cone thing (forgot it's name atm) so you want the record to be as loud as possible so the needle itself would vibrate more intensely. If you play one on a modern system with a pre-amp it's extremely loud and metallic sounding. That classic victrola sound from old timey movies. Unfortunately all the ones I have range from horrible to very very horrible condition as they was inherited down my family. They sat in my grandmas old house for some 40 years or more before I found them in a pile of junk. They have interesting titles which fit with those times. The songs sound almost ghostly when I played them. It's kinda strange gearing music which was recorded around 100 years ago.

[@cowsongs]

Loved the video. I am old enough to have owned vinyl record collections in the 60s and 70s, and I had turntables. There were some very *nice* changers in the 70s by higher-end brands like Dual that would more gently move the tone arm around. Some were cleverly designed to run the turntable at one modest speed during the changing cycle and only run at the selected speed while playing the record. And I recall seeing some models (maybe... Gerrard?) that would actually stop the turntable while lowering the next record from the stack, so there was absolutely no slipping/scratching of the disk as it dropped onto the one below it. While there probably is very little to no damage from dropping a record onto the spinning one below it, the real problem was in the way people handle stacks of records they are placing on the spindle. Even with care, as you stack up records in your hands, they rub over each other sideways and everyways before you get them on the spindle. And as you pointed out, if there is dirt in between the discs when the next disc drops onto the spinning one below it, it is going to make scratches that you will hear. And there is ALWAYS dirt on records. I don't hate record changers. I thought there were mechanical marvels. And even though I never used them because I could see and hear the wear they caused on my records, I don't begrudge anybody who has more fun with their music because they can put on a stack and enjoy their records.

[@mikegilbert2329]

I remember when making cassettes of a stack of my favorite 45s the sound of the mechanical changer would travel down the tonearm and end up on the recording. The only way to remedy this was to babysit the session and pause the cassette recorder between records when the changer was in motion.

[@sneskid78]

Dual mostly solved this with the addition of a simple mute switch that automatically engages and shorts the cartridge outputs when the auto function starts cycling. The cartridge remains shorted until the auto cycle is complete. I say mostly, because you can still hear a very brief click/thump type sound as the vibration from the mechanism is transferred through the platter right before the switch is engaged, and then again right after the switch is disengaged. But the sounds of the arm moving as well as the loud “pop” sounds that occur when the stylus is lifted off the disc and then set back down on the next disc, are muted.

[@dcampagna1772]

Right, and you would want to do that anyway because you’d be wasting tape, especially if you’re trying to cram both sides of an LP on one side of a 90 minute tape.

[@HoneyGlzedHam]

I would never sa......crifice quali......ty for conv....en....i...... "Stupid slow internet" *changes resolution to 480p*

[@KaleunMaender77]

*144p*

[@jonathanschaffer5758]

McDonald's vs home cooked convenience vs quality

[@thebonesaw..4634]

Having been brought up on tubed televisions for our entire lives, my wife and I "dumb-downed" our insanely expensive, top of the line LED flat screen. Everything just looked too real. Indoor Hollywood sets, intended to represent the outdoors, looked like indoor soap opera sets instead of the outdoors. However, a bit of fiddling with the settings and we were able to soften the picture enough in several areas so that it looked more like the TV we grew-up with again. It's still a much sharper picture, we just got rid of the "too perfect" look about it.

[@charoleawood]

@@jonathanschaffer5758 I have to take issue with this. I find it much more convenient to eat at home than to wait in a long fast food line. Of course, even without the long lines I wouldn't touch a fast food burger with a thirty-nine and a half foot pole.

[@aussieguy1012]

@@thebonesaw..4634 This is exactly why I havent gone 4k. It just takes away that tv or movie feel/charm. Oh nad the special effects stick out almost to the point of how they did in the 80s and 90s all over again lol

[@thomasking1490]

'Audiophiles hate them' Hold my beer...

[@randomsomeguy156]

Make sure to add a known name Edit: scrap that, a foreign name

[@jamesrindley6215]

Directional cables please.

[@maksuree]

@@jamesrindley6215 don't forget to split each cable into a pair of "balanced cables"!

[@reginalb124]

@@maksuree Charge 5 figures for said cables.

[@StopChangingUsernamesYouTube]

Add wooden knobs to improve the warmth and depth of the auditory oscillations, and I'll pay AT LEAST $20,000 for such a marvel of audio-magitech engineering!

[@richardmorgan1588]

Thank you for keeping it real. I confess to having a little north of normal costing music playback system in our home however I started with very humble beginnings. By the time I first saw record changers, I had already owned several record players. The first stereo record player I owned was a record changer with detachable speakers. I LOVED that record player. It didn’t harm my records so much. I listened to them over and over and over! Records are remarkably durable! I have the toys I have now and I love them; however I have loved it every step of the way! Every music system I’ve had from my first transistor radio to now has been a treasure to me!

[@drpicklephd]

might i just say i appreciate endlessly the really comprehensive captions you have on your videos. thank you!!

[@vlycop7404]

the "another video waiting to drop" and the vinyl drop was so sync it's uncanny Oo 17:31

[@felixc543]

I'm sure he had to do many takes to get the timing just right

[@t5o7m]

@@felixc543 | no, --that was the serendipity of it, --and he mentions that in the outro :)

[@brokenwave6125]

@@t5o7m He made it pretty clear in the outro that it was planned and he was excited he finally nailed it.

[@Broccolli1500]

The hints of salt and sarcasm are what make your videos amazing. Also ridiculously well made, keep it up!

[@QoraxAudio]

11:40 "Chastise audiophiles" 😂🤣

[@godofbiscuitssf]

I never did understand the audiophile attitude about vinyl because I've never seen anyone do laser measurements of the center-positioning of the disc they would listen to as an upper limit of the absolute lowest wow they could possibly hope for. ;)

[@QoraxAudio]

@@godofbiscuitssf Meh some audiophile do center positioning. They have a device for it, it's called the Nakamichi TX-1000

[@icarbonised4655]

What the actual everliving fu-

[@pearce554]

I went looking for a 30-second clip to explain record changers to someone and I stumbled on this. Not what I was looking for at all: but I was immediately gripped. I love this to bits.

[@pearce554]

Hi, me again. I came back and am watching this a second time. I still love it to bits.

[@performa9523]

The Sony shirt, the song about Laserdisc, a toaster reference... this channel truly has it all!

[@timgheys]

The drop was awesome. Should have seen it coming. Great timing.

[@fieryweasel]

"Did you see that ludicrous display last night?" That was a great addition.

[@PjotrV1971]

My parents used to have a front-loaded record player. It couldn't handle multiple records, but it was able to play both sides of the record without the user having to flip it over physically, due to it having an upside down stylus on the bottom side.

[@Adam-de8jm]

“Automatic beyond belief” are you calling back to the 60s toaster

[@red2theelectricboogaloo961]

toaster

[@Jaymac720]

Duh

[@uiopuiop3472]

kokokk

[@OtakuUnitedStudio]

40's.

[@TechnologyConnections]

Couple of extra notes! A younger version of me went a little overboard with a silver Sharpie. The record stabilizer would ordinarily be black. But silver's better. Duh. One thing I didn't mention was that it wasn't unheard of for changers to drop the next disc when... it wasn't a good time, plopping a disc on top of the tone arm. I don't know how common this really was, though. With the really thin records that started getting made in the '70s, I suppose they were more prone to dropping two-at-a-time or perhaps letting one slip. And maybe that helped drive them out, too. But this turntable's never done that to me, for what it's worth. The 7 inch setting would be used mainly for 45s, and to stack them, you'd either need to put a spider in each of them to give them a normal-sized spindle hole, or you'd use an adapter that would slide over the spindle and make a much bigger but functionally identical spindle. Sadly I don't have the adapter for this player, so I couldn't demonstrate it. And lastly, at one point Crosley (the modern, crappy one) was selling a "stack-o-matic" portable record player with a very cheap and very plastic changer inside of it. Those are probably without a doubt the worst changers available, so don't go making impressions about the others based upon its caliber. The Glenburn in this video is actually quite nice, and I'd consider using it daily were it not for the fact that it's really ugly, and plays slightly too fast.

[@FSM_Reviews]

Just putting this here as a place-marker.

[@kevind6645]

The very light 45's had another problem. They were so lightweight that there was insufficient friction , especially if there a even a small warp in the discs, and so the first record played fine as it was on the rubber platen, but subsequent disc would slip and go from just the drag of the stylus, making the changer unusable. As a sidenote, in 70's Australia, 45's came with the same small hole as a 33 so they would fit on the auto-changer without any form of adapter.

[@jonathandevries2828]

i love fun fact: etymology of the word "album."

[@AttilaAsztalos]

@Kevin D I suppose that would have been really easy to fix (but awkward as hell) by simply stacking the records interleaved with thin rubber discs covering only the label part, when assembling the stack...

[@user-jp7tw3sd3x]

I'm surprised that album records didn't had a metal washer disk at the center of the vinyl disk. It would avoid the erosion and it would prevent dropping two thin disks at once. But I guess it would make the records more expensive.

[@pearce554]

I just watched this again and I still love it to bits. I was using automatic record changers before you were born: but this is a brilliant piece of documentary filmmaking that took me right back to when that was all we had. All power to your elbow.

[@SomeShavedSheep]

The captions are spectacular. Just. Thank you

[@StephenHind]

"The first record changer to really find a grove" - appreciated and slipped in without fanfare!

[@NicholasSouris]

Agreed, glad I wasn't the only one to catch that. I half expected that meme with the grey and white dog with the cheesy grin.

[@KurosakiYukigo]

That cut off "the fu-?" made me laugh so hard, since you're the type not to swear. It really captured the sheer confusion of the situation.

[@RetroDoneRight]

I actually rewound it to double check.

[@BigOlSmellyFlashlight]

@@RetroDoneRight same

[@ptyzix]

Timecode?

[@buddyclem7328]

@@ptyzix 0:12

[@chrismcghee4867]

12 seconds in I’m laughing and absolutely hooked.

[@JMRSplatt]

Never stop with your amazing captions. I love it.

[@RedHotMessResell]

I loved my childhood CD changer so much, I still have it. I have the whole stack mom bought right before I was born. And then I bought a record player to go with it, and an aux and dongle for my phone. So now I can use every common form of audio. Thank you for doing a video on record changers, because this is something people don’t really talk about much anymore.

[@mchenrynick]

The thing that was most frustrating with those old record changers, is that many times it would drop 2 records at once :(

[@markhh]

Oh that’s right! Maddening!

[@andygozzo72]

@@markhh yep common problem 😉

[@Green__one]

Despite owning and using one of these for a long time, I never realized you could stack more than a single record up there. I always put one on the bottom, and one on the top of the spindle, and assumed that's all it could handle. I never tried a stack! You learn something every day!

[@KevinBenecke]

Or how about after the last record plays and the support arm doesn't drop all of the way down and the last record keeps repeating until you realize what is happening. Or how about the occasional record that the groove wasn't cut quite right and didn't carry the tonearm over far enough to trigger the return. I had a couple records like that where I thought the last record played only to walk in and find the record still spinning with the needle on the record.

[@andygozzo72]

@@KevinBenecke the arm can certainly stick if its in need of lubrication, never had a record that didnt trigger the mechanism at them end, but sometimes the opposite, triggering too early

[@SidShakal]

13:22 "Yeah, I can't hear it either." Same. Though, what I'm hearing is also digitized, compressed, and played through a cellphone speaker, an audiophile's nightmare. 😛

[@theblackwidower]

You must have a genuine Edison phonograph from 1852 to truly appreciate music.

[@SidShakal]

@@theblackwidower You must be the musician to truly appreciate a piece of music, for what are instruments but yet one more distortion of the artist's vision?

[@redoverdrivetheunstoppable4637]

had decent headphones on and no difference spotted, honestly the head of late turntable works with vertical and side movement mixed to a 45° angle (left and right), the diamond tip is possibly conical, so basically varying the inclination would turn in just a slight mixing between channels... that i can't give a fudge less... except maybe a bit of wear more on the disc due to the inclined tip inside a waved track (but they wear out anyways)

[@charlescampuz5812]

SidShakal Now that’s what I call: Bullshit! Most people don’t notice the difference when you compare the raw file to it’s compressed version, so why bother?

[@joelvarney5091]

I really appreciate the level of editing you put into these videos.

[@gworfish]

It's a weird experience to see a short documentary on something I grew up with. I don't feel like I'm old enough for the era of my childhood to be of historical interest. Really liked the look at the cams and such inside. My dad never let me take his turntable apart.

[@Dogsnark]

I know what you mean about not feeling old enough for things I once took for granted to be considered historical now. The record changer…I’d almost completely forgotten about these, but seeing them again they don’t seem so ancient. But show one to a teenager now and they wouldn’t have a clue. Time flies.

[@showalk]

"Automatic beyond belief" is this channel's "Water from the Nile."

[@amitabhsrivastava1255]

You seem to love toy videos. Heh!

[@KingBobXVI]

"...another video waiting to drop-" *_kthunk_* _Nice_ timing there, it's almost like it was scripted :P

[@tracer60]

And i wonder how many takes it took to get that just right .... lmao!!!!

[@d3210210]

Had to re-watch that part, just to be sure that actually happened.

[@kmfnj]

17:30 -- this guy really has it together!

[@macstevins]

I just noticed too, the song starts when the stylus hits the record

[@Dasher_The_Viral]

As awesome as this video about automatic vinyl playing is, can we please take a moment to appreciate the fact that the album that he chose to demonstrate with; "Retro Grooves Vol. 3", is absolutely FANTASTIC!?

[@JadeNeoma]

I suspect its just one of the few things you can get as a vinyl record that doesn't get copyright struck by youtube

[@Solitaire001]

What struck me most about the track "Discovision" is that the track features the voice of Leonard Nimoy from a film promoting the, then, new Discovision player.

[@acefox1]

Great video. Brings back so many memories of my parents big console record player at home.(imagine a big wood console with dinensions of 3’h x 18”w x 4’ l) Remembering their record changer made me remember they also had an adapter for 45 singles. It was a little bigger than the cardboard in a toilet paper roll that would fit over the record changer spindle. You could stack 45 singles and the changer latch would trigger the 45 singles adapter and stacker. Thank you for this video!

[@LevyNeptune]

I really loved that checklist bit lmao

[@fiverZ]

Dammit, I can't find it again in the video. Do you have a time stamp for it?

[@artistwithouttalent]

@@fiverZ 11:41 □Introduce Subject □Review History □Demonstrate Use □Explain Auto Sequencing □Chastise Audiophiles □Get On With It

[@Bootleg_Jones]

*AUDIOPHILES HATE HIM!!!* Play multiple records in a row, automatically, with one weird trick!

[@Wolf-Spirit_Alpha-Sigma]

Doctors hate him! Learn how to grow your... hair with this homemade drug.

[@fireaza]

You son of a bitch! I wanted to make that spam banner reference!

[@jakeblake231]

Once the single-most important item in their system begins to age, ( their ears), they will change. I did.

[@bobrobert1123]

What about toenail fungus

[@VixieTSQ]

Them*

[@ANo-qo4wk]

Thank you so much for being YOU! Every one of your videos is a gem!!

[@JamAttack]

Lmao I thought he meant Audio files like .wav and .ogg until I saw it written out and I was so confused.

[@Christopher-N]

Audiophial ≈ phonographic cylinders. I just made that word play up. Phial is British spelling of vial, which is basically a cylinder (permanently sealed on one side). I can't be sure how common the 'ph' spelling is over the 'v' spelling; *Periodic Videos* might be a good channel to ask that.

[@EpicB]

Maybe he's giving audiophiles too much FLAC.

[@zethcader6478]

@@EpicB Nice.

[@jonathandevries2828]

love the eye roll when talking about audiophiles lol

[@Lauren_C]

Next photographers need to be targetted for shunning smartphone cameras. 😝 I'm a photographer, please don't hurt me...

[@JacobFrey]

Well, the true fact is that once you start playing records that are stacked on top of other records that are resting on the platter, the Vertical Tracking Angle of the stylus has changed. If you're particular about how the turntable is setup and really care about the measurements that dictate how to get the best sound, then you wouldn't care much for changers. That said, the changer is more convenient, so some humans will take that tradeoff, as pointed out in the video. Nothing wrong with either argument.

[@vladg5216]

@@JacobFrey It also depends on the stylus that is used. Back when these record changers were popular, people exclusively used sperical or conical styluses, which are not affected by vertical tracking angles. Now that everyone is using fine-line styluses, VTA matters, so these record changes would affect the VTA too much from one record to the next.

[@subtledemisefox]

audiophools

[@firesurfer]

@@JacobFrey Nobody cared or even understood the concept.

[@ralphhoskins2115]

Love this video,, I’m 43 and have used record changers to play my records my whole life....I was amazed by them as a kid,,, and still love them today... great job man

[@professorplum3858]

Thanks man. I just bought a rather large one for my mother that we plan on restoring complete with added radio and eight track player. It's the first time I had seen a longer spindle like that and I was a bit hesitant to put my own records on there to test it out without any prior knowledge. I really learned a lot :)

[@gslim7337]

A neat "trick" I use to do to my brother's record player was to select a 12" disc, then put on 7" single. Amazing sound use to come out of the rubber mat.

[@potatosordfighter666]

What if you made a rubber slipmat that actually had a song or message on a groove in it?

[@colintomlinson4577]

And if you were playing one record (single or LP), you could leave the arm over to the side (in the position it would be when loading records onto the spindle) and use then use auto for repeat (it would go through the motions of dropping the next record, but then play the same one again). Now to show my age, even more than the above paragraph: instead of "audiophiles", I heard "audio files" and wondered if there was some sort incompatibility issue caused by the changer!

[@Tahngarthor]

In fact he uses "audio file" as a joke in another video referring to a sound effect record album: "It's the only audio file guaranteed never to start an argument."

[@mechanicalmusic]

True with most of the later machines where you manually selected the size, but those with auto-size indexing, that didn't always work. It could end up playing the record at 7" or 10" even if it was a 12" record (or like my Garrard 3000, at 12" if a smaller record was on) as they depended on the record falling past a size sensor/lever to determine size.

[@tracer60]

I seem to remember (having been born 1960) seeing at least one that had another microswitch on the record stabilizer to detect it's lateral position, making that unlikely on at least that one machine. It had to have been manufactured very shortly before 1960 because i think it was nearly new when i was born.

[@Free_Samples]

I absolutely love your channel and content, please never stop making videos.

[@Lanthanideification]

Yeah, he's getting the tone and humour just right.

[@RodLofton]

I 100% agree. I f&%$ing love this guy. His humor is top notch.... and he's also informative!

[@GentleMannOfHats]

I almost read that as "please stop making videos"

[@deetlebee]

Always great CCs. Appreciate the effort!

[@sebastianswaltz]

Long time viewer, first time commenter. I just rewatched this video after starting my own vinyl record collection last year. I have a few sequenced albums like this already, and I started stacking them on the platter like you showed. Just wanted to share this little tip I found: Yes, I do not like the way the records rub together once initially started while stacked, but I found an easy solution. I just give them and my platter a good spin with my hand, and then hit the start button. This gives them a little bit of a head start spinning locked together over just starting them from a dead stop (and it doesn't take too much human power to get them close to spinning around 33rpm before the motor takes over). Just thought I'd share this little revelation I found. Keep making great videos! I love to watch them!

[@ame9418]

"record listening experience that is *AUTOMATIC BEYOND BELIEF!!!* " …is that another toaster refference…

[@sofia.eris.bauhaus]

not suprising, if you consider what they say about toasters!

[@ame9418]

@@sofia.eris.bauhaus Rather toasty innit?

[@redbasher636]

I never knew how much I needed your channel till I found it man. I love this channel so much- you seem so wholesome, so genuinely interested in what you're talking about and it's so informative. NEVER CHANGE.

[@jamesisaac7684]

Same

[@dominateeye]

You mean never RECORD change! Eh? Eh? Eh.

[@redbasher636]

@@dominateeye Made me snort

[@witmoreluke]

Super psyched about the "drop" at the end too lol, that is fantastic!

[@pjimmbojimmbo1990]

I never used my Changer as a Changer, I removed the stack spindle, put in a Snub, and then locked the Leveling Arm out of the way and used it as an Automatic Single Play.

[@slaughterround643]

8:11 "They're like photo albums..." A good portion of your audience: "what's a photo album?"

[@clarenceboddicker6679]

A Photo album is a music album recorded by the band Photo

[@henryrichard7619]

It’s the group thing on my photo app

[@andrewdubose9968]

Gooby pls

[@jacobmccloskey171]

Look at this photograph

[@ic_trab]

@@jacobmccloskey171 *shudders*

[@Joey14584]

The first album I had to deal with having weird sides was Tommy - and I didn't notice well into Side 4. As a concept album, I was completely confused by the story's inconsistency.

[@ZGryphon]

Heh, when I saw _WarGames_ the first time, the theater showed the reels out of order. I still don't really understand that movie's narrative sequence.

[@FernieCanto]

"As a concept album, I was completely confused by the story's inconsistency." After you finally listened to the records in the correct order, you were *even more* confused, I'm sure.

[@scatteredfrog]

Heh. Try the first album by Stephen Stills' Manassas band. It had sides 1 and 3 on one record and 2 and 4 on the other!

[@tilleye3774]

>Australian inventor has trouble getting his design to work. "Likely due to difficulties in getting records to play upside down."

[@Attacknun]

It's okay, even in order it can be a little hard to follow.

[@christhomas7905]

Brilliant video as always! You know how to entertain your viewers with subtle jokes and quips whilst sharing information.

[@mar4kl]

I am thoroughly enjoying your videos! In addition to your friendly, approachable presentation style, you have a talent for explaining the science behind the technology in ways that provide a basic understanding without overwhelming your audience. This particular video was fun for me to watch because I grew up with record changers like the one you demonstrated. Here are a few of my perspectives, based on the ones we had. My parents owned a 1962 Magnavox Astro Sonic console, commonly known as a "hi fi set". Its built-in record changer was what most people considered fully automatic. That is to say, you selected the speed (it offered 16, 33, 45 and 78 RPM) and put your record(s) on the changer, and, unless you explicitly did not turn the dial switch all the way to Auto, the changer did the rest. Thanks for explaining the automatic disc size sensor - I always used to wonder why that thing's tonearm moved up, left, and right once before the record dropped. That changer didn't have a manual disc size selector, so if you were playing a nonstandard size record (which we sometimes did), then you had to slide the record all the way down onto the platter, turn the activator dial to "On" instead of "Auto" and place the tonearm manually. Our console's built-in record changer began slowing down - literally - around 1975. Dad tried his best to fix it, but failed, and since we lived in a small town, rather than in a big city where one might have been able to call a Magnavox repairman to come out and fix it, he decided instead to replace the changer by buying a Radio Shack turntable similar to the one in your video, removing it from its enclosure and retrofitting it into the console. Alas, other than its nicer magnetic cartridge (the original tonearm had a ceramic one, and yes, that meant Dad's next purchase was a preamplifier kit), that replacement was never as good as the original. The replacement lacked an automatic disc size sensor, and it only had 33 and 45 speeds, so it couldn't play our 16s and 78s (hah, we had some of each!). But, more importantly, Dad couldn't find a way to retrofit the damping system from the new turntable into the Magnavox console, so we had to tiptoe around the living room while records were playing to avoid skips. I remember the warnings, mostly from younger friends, that changers were bad for records, but there were a couple of more realistic concerns than the ones you mentioned as to why. I don't remember being overly concerned about records sliding over each other when the next one was dropped on the platter, but there was an actual risk of scratching that careless users (or children) would sometimes inflict if they didn't hold the record carefully while moving the changer arm into position. Yeah, I know, so be careful and enjoy, right? Of course right. The other concern was that while the changers usually worked fine, a carelessly loaded stack, a damaged spindle hole, or a little something sticky that somehow got in the spindle hole (the children again, most likely) could sometimes result in the next record being precariously held in place at the top of the spindle after the first one dropped, and a little too much vibration could send that record down on top of the tonearm, which would damage both records. I can't remember actually seeing that happen, but it was the sort of concern that a friend lending you a nice record might express. That said, I think there were some more important reasons why changers went out of vogue. One of them had to do with a departure from why they went IN vogue in the first place. As you said, changers were most important when music was played at 78 RPM, and listening to an album meant changing records every 4-5 minutes. The long-playing record made that less of a necessity (let's face it, we mostly just put on one record at a time, and only used the changer because it was there). Then, the popularity of music radio in the 1960s and '70s, combined with the introduction of stereo tape recorder decks, changed the way we listened to music. Who really wanted to listen to 20-25 minutes of the same band anymore? People, especially younger people, started making their own compilation tapes and playing those when company came over. At that point, the changer just made it that much more difficult to make your compilations. Another thing that I think was relevant to the demise of changers was the popularity of component stereo rigs. In the early days of record changers, phonograph was low-fi. From the 1950s to early 1970s, all-in-one console stereos were popular. Those sounded pretty good, but were never able to match the sound quality of a good component stereo, and even a non-audiophile like me could tell the difference. A turntable laden with the mechanical gimmickry required to make a changer work simply couldn't match the fine tonearm balancing of a non-changing turntable, nor the better platter speed regulation. But I think the final nail in the coffin of the record changer was the rise of the DJ. During the 1970s, and, especially, 1980s, DJs went from being a mostly invisible function of a music radio station to a highly visible, glamorous presence at parties and in clubs. DJs, of course, needed to be able to switch discs quickly, and needed low-profile turntables with nothing to obstruct disc switching, i.e., no changers. That led young people, the primary consumers of stereo equipment, to want to fiddle more with their home stereos. Changers are great for people who just want to put on a stack of records and forget it, but for those who want to flip and change records more often, record changer mechanisms were just plain in the way. Anyway, that's the history that I remember. Others will no doubt have their perspectives. In any case, thanks for the look back. It was really cool to see one of those changers in action again.

[@elizabethsullivan1894]

"By this time, we had already decided that cylinders were the Betamax of sound formats..." I don't know why, but that line cracked me up for some reason.

[@robsemail]

perhaps because a Betamax cartridge was hidden in the on-screen image right after he said it.

[@markusbocker2027]

Perfect timing with the "drop"... Entertaining and informative as always!

[@KNfLrPn]

Glad he said it was real because it was definitely too perfect to believe.

[@ksaspectre]

Timestamp please

[@markusbocker2027]

Here we are: 17:32

[@ksaspectre]

@@markusbocker2027 Thanks! Have an amazing day

[@sadielappin8862]

I just found one of these from about 1973 in a long-abandoned house I’ve been renovating and the extra arm and switches was mystifying to me. My parents were little help (“Oh, yeah I wanted one of those so badly as a kid, never got one.” and “Your uncle had one and wouldnt let me near it, no clue how it works.”). So actually seeing how a working one functions without the dismissive “These are garbage” I’ve been finding is excellent. Great video.

[@keymbord]

5:45 FINALLY. I found a notched spindle a long time ago in a bucket of free pins and I could never figure out what it was. Thank you!

[@LukeRemirez]

"Did you see that ludicrous display last night?" That one got me. Girly giggles.

[@GabrielGonzalez2]

What was Wenger thinking sending Walcott on that early?

[@nthgth]

The thing about Arsenal is, they always try to walk it in.

[@proffesionalweredog7426]

time stamp?

[@lawrencedoliveiro9104]

0:51 There is a similar thing in book/magazine printing called “imposition”. This is where you arrange the printing of pages in fours on double-width sheets so that when they are folded in the middle and stacked and bound together, the page numbers end up in the correct sequence.

[@annwrubel1090]

Thanks so much for this! My 22 yr old son could not grasp the idea of how we used to listen to a stack of records! Now he gets it. I want one of these again!

[@misterhoeflak]

Really enjoy your videos. I've always loved electronics and was obsessed with turntables as a kid! Well researched and presented.

[@bugalaman]

Your videos are too damned smart, and that's why I love them.

[@sciencehistoryandentertain734]

In the 1980's I use to play stacks of records... Especially during Christmas...

[@jeffreycollins7297]

Lots of us did. Good memories.

[@tanya5322]

Science, history and entertainment my grandma did that when I was a kid, in the 1960s and 70s. She was still doing it in the early 2000s (She passed away in 2010 at the age of 100)

[@inujosha]

In the 1980s, I was born. 😀

[@michaelturner4457]

@distantsunset Tommy, can you hear me?

[@williamschmidt3267]

I remember this as well. My parents would always take the Christmas records out when they would start decorating and it was so magical

[@firstnamelastname6118]

Fascinating video. I think this explains the wear around the hole on the records my grandfather gave me.

[@silhouettoofaman2935]

Dude, the timing of that last part... BRILLIANT!

[@paulcoddington664]

Stacks of records often slipped (huge wow would be understatement) and possibly had tracking angle issues (audibly irrelevant for low end systems). Problems were made worse when some discs in the stack had warps. Some turntables had a short lever that the record edge brushed against as it dropped to detect the size (by measuring degree of deflection, a lot for 12", less for 10", none at all for 7"), so you could stack any combination on such units. Garrard had a range of turntables like this (they had interchangeable short/long spindles for manual/automatic and a lever for flipping a double sided stylus over for 45/33/16 vs. 78 (the latter needs a wider stylus). Some records had thick raised ridged rings around the label to prevent slippage, but this meant the bulk of the disc was effectively floating in the air unsupported (probably also audibly irrelevant on a low-end system, might even make things better if the underlying record had a mild warp as it might sit flatter). Wider cartridges would rub against the ridged rings when they reached the end groove, making a horrifically loud and unpleasant buzzing sound. I suspect one reason why higher end turntables would not have such features (apart from issues with stacking, warps, slippage, etc) would be KISS (easier to make a reliable turntable with accurate speed and low rumble if mechanism is kept very simple).

[@petergathercole4565]

I was going to say the same about the raised rings around the label. but I have seen the rings not only raised, but also as a series of raised dots that would engage with the next record rather like cog teeth to keep the whole stack locked together. Also, one other feature of these dots (at least on EMI records in the UK) is that they were spaced so that when observed under a filament lamp run at the prevailing 50Hz when spinning at the normal speed, the dots would apparently appear still due to the strobe effect of the light, allowing you to judge the speed accuracy of the turntable. One thing that was not mentioned was that all of the autochangers that I have seen used rim-drive turntables, where a rubber wheel would transmit the movement from the motor (using different sized section of the spindle for the different speeds) to a lip on the bottom of the turntable. Rim drive turntables tend to rumble a lot more (because of the physical contact between the motor drive mechanism and turntable), and if the rubber wheel gets deformed (for example if it were left engaged because of a power failure), it causes an unpleasant speed 'blip' each time it goes round. The other undesirable feature compared with the most audiophile accepted turntables is that each bit of mechanical linkage on the turntable and arm can introduce drag (as you pointed out) but also slackness in the tonearm and turntable bearings, which can lead to loss of clarity in the stereo image (something that Anders Jensen's synth music would not really show). You only appreciate this if you've actually listened to some half decent audio setup with naturally recorded music (binaural recording, for example). If you've not heard this, it's difficult to appreciate what you're missing, and you don't miss what you've never had! The bearing movement was not really an issue when ceramic cartridges were in use, which used to track at a downforce measured in 10s of grammes (often set with a spring rather than a counterbalance). But when moving magnet cartridges came in, they generally tracked at under 10 grammes, so the heavy tonearms were not suitable. In fact, I'm surprised that your Glenburn was fitted with what looks like a Shure moving magnet cartridge. I have seen belt and direct-drive turntables with auto stop and auto return mechanisms (but not autochangers), but the comments about drag and play are still relevant, which is why audiophiles want the simplest drive and bearing mechanisms possible. And yes, I know about what is acceptable to the masses is good enough, but that does not prevent those people who have the opportunity for hearing audio at it's best from striving to do so.

[@goodun6081]

@@petergathercole4565 , excellent comments. I am an audio repair technician who frequently fights with the boss for taking in potential repairs that we really shouldn't be dicking with at this point. I just repaired yet another Dual fully automatic turntable (a 1241 record changer) , which arrived with damaged audio cables and hum issues, and those turned out to be the least of his problems. Someone else had changed the belt to a completely wrong size, and played around with the adjustments. The lubrication was gelled up and the lubricated sleeves and bearings of the changer mechanism were almost completely seized, which in my experience might actually be the result of a chemical reaction between the metals and the lubricant. The Speed select and associated belt lifter mechanism which transfers the belt to the correct part of the stepped pulley were sticky and wouldn't reliably work right to the very end of their ranges, and they are also linked to the cam- screw adjustments for the pickup and set down points, which are Interactive. The platter is one piece, with just a couple small cut-outs, making it difficult to observe the operation of the motor pulley and belt and associated mechanisms. The service manual contains numerous errors and the explanation of how the various adjustments work is very poorly written. Exact Original parts are of course no longer available, and the aftermarket belts we have (from somewhere on the internet) that are supposed to be exact replacements for nine or ten various Dual models didn't work correctly, and we had to search through hundreds of our own belt stock to find something that would work correctly. It's just not worth working on these things. I did get it working reliably, and it sounded pretty good, but these types of units are always a headache. I'll take almost any basic belt drive semi automatic turntable, a Technics or Pioneer or whatever, over one of these things. Or better yet, a fully manual turntable. A Rega, a Linn, or even a Pro-ject or U-turn..... I also shudder when people bring in any kind of turntable with Servo Motors to operate the tonearm. Many of these units use optocouplers or special LEDs or various photosensitive devices to read the arm position and/ or to sense the size of the record on the platter, and many of these devices are no longer available.

[@im1fadedRob]

"Most humans will happily make sacrifices to quality for convenience." Preach.

[@russellhltn1396]

Exhibit A: The audio cassette. Not originally designed to be a replacement for HiFi open reel tapes, but it ended up there. Convenient? Check! Quality? You're joking, right? I mean, better than 8-track maybe...

[@aSpeedbump]

Hence, MP3's

[@Clay3613]

@@aSpeedbump MP3 is great, I can fit an artists whole discography into 32GB! Now try that with something like FLACC or Orbis, impossible.

[@russellhltn1396]

@@aSpeedbump A good MP3 will outshine a number of formats, and can come very close to the best ones. www.npr.org/sections/therecord/2015/06/02/411473508/how-well-can-you-hear-audio-quality

[@mybigfatpolishlife]

That's why VHS won

[@justice_w6]

That checking off of the "Chastise Audiophiles" caused me to read it out loud while having quite a nice chuckle. Thank you for that, sir.

[@luvmyrecords]

Actually, the surfaces of the records made during the era of the record changer had the edges a little raised, as well as the labels. RCA actually made something called "Gruve Guard". In the 40s, there were special felt decals that could be applied to the edges of the labels of the records, so that there would be little to no spinning of the record that came down. Also, in the 78 era, it was recommended that the first disc be placed on the turtable, instead of allowing it to drop down. The mats were not terribly soft, and so the first records were vulnerable to breakage. Dealers often kept extra copies of the disc with the first and last sides of a set in stock! Also, sets were issued simultaneously in manual and automatic sequencing in the 78 era.

[@8MoonsOfJupiter]

"Chastise audiophiles" - check! LOL :-) I really like how you can take a seemingly simple concept (a mechanical record changer) and explore it in such an interesting and fun way as to make it a fascinating journey of discovery. Great work - one of your best (and funniest!) videos yet.

[@EElgar1857]

There's also a raised "bead" around the outside of most LPs, to keep the grooves from actually rubbing.

[@davealthoff4914]

...plus the label in the center. Once I saw a demo where someone cut a sector out of a record, stacked it on another record and demonstrated how a sheet of paper can fit between the stacked discs.

[@dbeierl]

@@davealthoff4914 until it gets a little warped, anyway.

[@johnfrancisdoe1563]

Dave Althoff Not an easily repeated demo, as the teacher has to buy new records for each attempt.

[@goodun6081]

Simple physics principles such as inertia ---- an object in motion tends to remain in motion unless acted on by an outside force ---- will explain how, when the next-in-line record drops onto the record that was previously placed on the platter, although the falling record might indeed land on the raised bead around the outer edge of the lp first, the center of the falling record is going to want to keep traveling downward, and the flexible nature of the LP, especially with records that were manufactured with thin vinyl in the early and mid 70s due to the oil crisis and the vinyl shortage, means that the center of those records will invariably Flex downward and contact the spinning record that is already on the platter. Any dust in between them will tend to get ground into the grooves, and you know that having all those records sitting on a tall spindle above the record that is actually playing are going to be subject to static buildup from the interface of the stylus and the record being played. Yes, the air pressure created by the falling disc might cushion the blow a little bit, but the static charge of the records will likely prevent the air from blowing any of the dust away, and indeed it might force the dust and dirt deep into the record grooves. And then, consider the fact that so many record changer turntables were built with massive tone arms that either didn't incorporate anti skate, or had fixed anti skate that wasn't adjustable and could not be set to match the tracking force of the cartridge and stylus being used. Sometimes the tonearm had no tracking Force adjustment at all. Many of these turntables couldn't be used with any type of cartridge other than the one supplied by the manufacturer, often a cheap ceramic cartridge with minimal fidelity, tracking at many grams or even a large fraction of an ounce of pressure, and combined with enormous side-to-side friction in the arm pivot mechanisms and bearings, the tonearm and cartridge are capable of producing maximum record wear. When you can't change to a better sounding that would be gentler on the records, can't adjust the geometry of the stylus position using a quality turntable setup gauge ( in order to achieve lowest possible distortion and minimal record wear), can't adjust the anti skate and perhaps can't even adjust the tracking force, this is not a device that you want to be playing your treasured records on! Not to mention that so many record changers were designed with Rim Drive (idler drive) that simply by virtue of its design has fairly high wow and flutter and transfers enormous amounts of motor vibration, AKA rumble, into the platter and into the cartridge where it could be reproduced (with difficulty, and causing intermodulation distortion) by your amplifier and speakers. While I appreciate the engineering challenges posed by these devices and the work that went into making them function, the sound quality from the majority of record changers is mediocre or even in the best-case scenario, not much better than average. And as an electronic technician who has been repairing vintage audio equipment for decades, I can tell you that the serviceability of these machines, 40 to 70 years after they were made, is extremely poor, time-consuming, and expensive.

[@goodun6081]

I don't believe 45 RPM records had a raised bead around the edges. Also see my other longer post below.

[@sixstringedthing]

0:33 I like the way he subtly roasted himself by briefly popping up the "1974 Decca Records" trademark off the label while he was suggesting people sucked at numbers in the sixties. And then followed up with "well, a few people did". Top notch understated humour.

[@kavenmendes]

I learned a lot from this video. Thanks for covering these neat little machines

[@moonchild4806]

Man you cranked up the sass meter and I love it.

[@HolyAvgr]

Dude, you took the words right out of my brain. The sass is off the charts. *Awkward pause as I reach for another set of records*

[@bagoston325]

I literally got hard chills when that Victor machine dropped that record. Phew!!

[@JohnPepp]

The thing I didn't like about Record Changers is after time they sometimes wouldn't work properly especially after you had used the record player for some time. They sometimes would drop more than one record or drop a record on the stylus accidentally when it was playing another record.

[@majorramsey3k]

I've only had that happen with 180G records. Too heavy. I don't recommend stacking those.

[@TexTom1981]

BSRs were notorious for that.

[@cerealchild166]

This brought back some really good memories!! Thank you so much!!!

[@whirledpeaz5758]

Thank you for the blast from the past, I grew up in the 70's and remember placing large stacks of 4, 5, 6 records on the changer to listen for hours.

[@missinghood]

TC is basically my brain with tons of time to research and take apart what I am curious about.

[@johnmccormick8159]

The numbering scheme for record changers worked well for live albums. My first stereo had one. Technics sold a couple of high quality record-changer turntables. (I got my first vinyl records in 1975)

[@rpm6085]

A perfectly timed drop during the thanks at the end. Quality.

[@jl721ATcairn]

Part of the purpose of the raised label/edges was to minimize the potential for damage on a changer. I have a Technics SL-D5 myself (look it up).

[@efandmk3382]

The purpose of the raised edge was to move the stylus inward to the lead groove and not fall off the edge. the fact that it helped keep the groves of two discs from touching was just a happy coincidence.

[@danieldaniels7571]

John Lasher nice! That’s a quality changer that I would use. The BSR in this video is a shit show that I would not subject my records nor ears to. The issues are none of the things he mentions aside from damaging the label near the hole. It’s the crap quality stylus and cartridge, the arm on top that can scratch the records, and the ridiculously high tracking force of that awful tonearm. Problems your Technics doesn’t have.

[@jimb032]

Just got. Sl-d5 in 2019! Inherited some records from the folks, want to play them. 😀

[@johnspink6957]

This was how we created a playlist in the 60s & 70s :-)

[@chevrolet756]

Thanks a lot you got me addicted to these song they are in my playlist on Spotify I drive my 18wheeler to these now. Love them!!

[@willausterman3104]

I bought one before I went off to college in 2014, it was awesome for study sessions! Also the lip around the edge of the LPs and the raised labels of 45s keep the discs from rubbing their playing surfaces