Gramophone needle angle test

[@GramophonicReevolution]

Another great vid. The angle makes a huge difference on surface noise as does the needle choice for the record. This kind of proves a point for trailer needles and how they are suited for heavily worn records. They change the point of contact in a similar way as you tilting the sound box . Great vid :) Cheers Paul

[@mrrgstuff]

Thanks 😀 👍. I might keep this one at the extra angle for worn records then.

[@christo930]

Perhaps its something in the way it is being recorded, but the homemade ones sound way better. The reduction of surface noise is nothing short of amazing.

[@mrrgstuff]

The recording rig was the same for all shots, and basically relied on a camcorder on a fixed mount so the mic was the same distance each time. I don't have this set up anymore, but am experimenting with recording inside the gramophone. One video already posted on this subject kzbin.info/www/bejne/o2Gxp4qrpLiSfNU and another on its way. The soundbox itself didn't fit the gramophone hence the 3D printed adapter. I believe the soundbox is fairly early so probably 100+ years old now, but have no details on it. Curiously enough I did buy another virtually identical one in a job lot of soundboxes, also uploaded as a video recently. kzbin.info/www/bejne/enqnn5iXaqh9idU Thanks 😀 👍

[@tiga4180]

Given a similar needle angle, it would appear that the surface noise depends on the frequency response of the soundbox. As for varying the needle angle, it will alter the profile which is presented to the 'V' shaped grooves. I'm theorising that at a really acute angle, the tip of the needle doesn't touch the bottom of the groove where there will be most wear, but the wider part of the tapered needle will be playing their less worn edges. A truncated elliptical stylus (which clearly won't reach the bottom of the grooves), is favoured by many for the electrical reproduction of 78's.

[@mrrgstuff]

Yes, so its points to the new one having less frequency response than the No.4. Assuming I do rebuild it though, the frequency response might improve but at the cost of more surface noise. I have some ideas for testing the frequency response of soundboxes, but they will take some time to work out. Frequency response graphs were produced back in the day, but I don't know how they were achieved. Thanks 😀 👍

[@tiga4180]

@@mrrgstuff I suppose there's always a compromise & cutting out the surface noise may also mean unclear consonants (especially sibilants & aspirants) which were always weak in acoustic records. Maybe its best to just use the soundbox/gramophone, that's the overall best for a given record. You could always use an acute needle angle for a noisy record, which so far seems to reduce noise without compromising brilliance. Getting into measuring frequency responses sounds like hard work! One last point: Ever thought of trying to enhance 'ghost sounds' found on acoustic records? Have heard faint 'start cues' or 'counting in' Also heard muffled conversation or shuffling in the final grooves. Sadly, always inaudible on my postings.

[@mrrgstuff]

Yes, I suppose there is never going to be a perfect soundbox, and electrical reproduction revolutionised playback just as it had done previously for recording. I am still fascinated by fully acoustic systems though. Frequency response measuring may be beyond me, it its worth a go and I believe other amateurs have managed to do it in the past. I think the key is getting the needle to vibrate by means other than a record! Definitely worth a video or 2 in the future though 🤔. Not tried anything with ghost sounds, mainly because I haven't come across any yet, but it does sound like a fascinating subject and I would give it a go, if I came across a suitable record. Thanks 😀 👍

[@tiga4180]

@@mrrgstuff You usually have to listen close to the horn from the moment the needle touches & then do the same for the final grooves. In some cases you may be lucky & these final grooves go on for several seconds. A faint "Ready!" or "Go!" may be heard, or a conductor tapping his baton to 'count in' In those final grooves I've heard shuffling (perhaps musicians putting down instruments), or muffled conversation. Jumbo records seem especially prone to this. In Hamilton Hill's 'Goodbye Little Girl' on Zonophone s/sided, he says: "What did they think?" at the end. So far, none of these have been audible enough for my digital camera.

[@mrrgstuff]

OK, I must go and have a closer listen to some of my older records. I only have one Jumbo and I had to buy the whole box of records in the charity shop just to get that one! Thanks 😀 👍

[@TranscendentalAirwaves]

Holy cow the difference is insane!

[@mrrgstuff]

Thanks 👍😀

[@Timothycan]

I think more surface noise perhaps also means higher frequency response?

[@mrrgstuff]

Interesting point. I'd like to be able to test stuff like this, but need to work more at my test setup really. Thanks 😀 👍

[@steelneedles]

Besides surface noise, there is also wear to consider. I have been told that the point of the needle should be just slightly forward of the central spindle but at that angle it looks a bit vertical to me, so I turn mine a little more forward. People talk about proper tracking but how exact does it have to be ? Even the type of needle you use will make a slight difference as to where the point meets the disc because some needles are longer than others.

[@mrrgstuff]

Yes, there are many factors and with things like tracking, a lot of the older machines were poorly designed and have terrible tracking. These can be fixed to an extent, but I don't worry overly about it. Lots of scope for experimentation though. Thanks 😀 👍

[@neilgoloy3582]

That was interesting. Thank you so much!

[@mrrgstuff]

Thanks 😀 👍

[@moscas85]

Hello! Maybe you know the answer: many of my records sound distorted (and it is not about the records: I have another gramophone also). I read that it can be a sound box angle. But what angle seems to be the good one? In my HMV there is not much space for changing the angle.

[@mrrgstuff]

With HMV gramphones, the soundbox connection is a bayonet style, and this sets the soundbox at a suitable angle. It is possible that distortion is caused by hardened gaskets, which can be changed. This video might help: kzbin.info/www/bejne/eJ-kdXmZjNecoJo Thanks 😀 👍

[@AllMy78s]

Well I woud say that the increased angle does cause less surface noise, and have to say prefer it to the number 4 well done...

[@mrrgstuff]

Yes, certainly better (or at least less noisy) than that No.4. I really should service one of my No.4s as they probably haven't been looked at since they were new. Thanks 😀 👍

[@AllMy78s]

@@mrrgstuff I have a 5A that is troublesome, needs a good service, if ever you want a project... ;)

[@mrrgstuff]

Is that the one you took to pieces? That's the video I found your channel by. I think you did a good job as the 5A is apparently tricky to work on. Maybe one day though it would make a good project 🤔. Thanks 😀 👍

[@AllMy78s]

@@mrrgstuff Yeah, I never got it right to be honest, it has a buzz on high frequencies, it may be that it needs a new gasket or a needle bar adjustment... If you ever want to borrow it to play with??? I'll pay, just let me know... :)

[@mrrgstuff]

@@AllMy78s Well, it would be a challenge! You have seen my level of 'expertise' 😉 so I couldn't guarantee to fix it, however I could certainly have a look at it in a future video or 2 and see what I can do. If you email me on the mrrgstuff Gmail in my 'About' section, then I'm sure we can arrange something. Thanks 😀 👍

[@Mrpurple75]

I prefer it to the number 4 definitely.

[@mrrgstuff]

Strangely enough I have started to use this No.4 more with older records as it ought to be more suited to them compared to the 5B. However maybe I will use this little one instead. The tonearm adapter doesn't help the tracking, but I might be able to improve on that. Thanks 😀 👍

[@GrandadIsAnOldMan]

I think I could hear a difference but I think we are at my hearing limits rather than the soundboxs.

[@mrrgstuff]

I can only really tell the difference most of the time when I hear them side by side in a video. Most of the time in real life they just sound fine. Not the case for my DIY ones though! They can sound really quite bad all the time 😉. Thanks 😀 👍

[@davidk6271]

I think it’s the sound box rather than the angle isn’t it? To my ears anyway. Has the no.4 had a new gaskets/ insulator etc? Come to that , ha# the other one?

[@mrrgstuff]

None of them have had new gaskets or anything, so the performance of both isn't going to be as good as it could. It is something I hope to get around to doing at some point. I'm fairly sure the new one one has been rebuilt at some point, (or at least worked on) but that must have been a long time ago. Thanks 😀 👍

[@davidk6271]

mrrgstuff did you do a decibel test to see if the original angle sb came out quieter?

[@mrrgstuff]

No, I didn't on this one. I haven't really found a good reliable method of doing DB tests, but it is something I should be able to do better in the future, and I may well revisit this soundbox to see how its performs on volume. Thanks 😀 👍

[@YeshuaGod22]

I’d be interested to know what effect the dimensions of the soundbox have on its voice. Would you consider printing an iteration of your design in different sizes for comparison?

[@mrrgstuff]

Its an interesting idea, and certainly soundboxes with different sized diaphragms can have quite significant differences in volume, tone, bass etc. There are some practical considerations, especially that the centre height of the soundbox will be too low or too high for the tonearm which will affect the angle of the needle across the groove which will limit how big or small the soundbox can be. This can be got around by redesigning some of the parts. The connector to the tonearm also needs to stay the same size, so the back can't just be scaled but would require modification. Having said all that, I still think its a good idea that would be worth investigating further. Thanks 😀 👍

[@YeshuaGod22]

I’ve been playing with an idea in my head the last few days of creating a guitar that used 6 separate gramophone sound boxes, each agitated by a needle arm looped around one of the guitar strings, feeding into a 3D printed knot of 6 individual horns twisted into the space which would normally be the sound cavity. I suspect 6 different sizes of soundbox and 6 different lengths and widths of horn would give the best result. I’m a long way off working out where I’m going to get the cad skills to design the horn array or the casting skills to create the monocoque chassis from nut to tailpiece (smoothtalker meets canna guitar), but I’ll be following your experiments with great interest in the meantime!

[@mrrgstuff]

Sounds like a fascinating and quite complicated build, though I sure it would be very rewarding and a fantastic instrument when its done. It reminded me of this which was used in the early days of recording and I note a very interesting Romanian variant which is even more appropriate (though the bit about the use of tungsten seems garbled and incorrect to me). Thanks 😀👍 en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroh_violin

[@rocketaroo]

Tweeking is fun

[@mrrgstuff]

Indeed 😀👍

[@theamertureradioenthusiast3368]

I can't believe you have to change the needle every play I think I'll bin mine a restored

[@mrrgstuff]

Yes, but its not so much of a pain really. Just buy a packet of 400 new ones on ebay and you will get used to changing them pretty quickly. There were needles made which would last 10 or even more plays, but they just wear the records down and I don't think people use them much anymore. Thanks 😀 👍

[@SwedishEmpire1700]

@@mrrgstuff How about cactus needles and bamboo? heard they are the best, but i dunno.

[@mrrgstuff]

I do have some fibre needles, but not tried them yet. I have moved onto soft tone needles recently as they wear the record less than the mediumtone ones. Thanks 😀 👍

[@musicglobal5908]

hmv no 4 not good to much surface noise

[@mrrgstuff]

Thanks 😀 👍

[@kenherrera2819]

There was more surface noice on the #4 but the music sounded fuller with more bass than with the other one. At least to my ears the music and voice, even with surface noise, sounded more natural with the #4. The other sounded very muffled, almost like you'd hear from a really cheap radio broadcast through bad speakers.