On an Overgrown Pathé

[On an Overgrown Pathe]

The Edison Disc Reproducers: A Comparative Survey

Part II: Acoustic Dance Music

[Italian version here]

Product names: Edison Standard, Dance, and Edisonic reproducers
Manufacturers: Thomas A. Edison, Inc. - USA (defunct)
Author: David Hoehl - TNT-Audio USA
Published: February, 2025

The first article in this three-part series introduced the various models of Edison disc reproducers and demonstrated each in an orchestral selection recorded acoustically. Today we turn our attention to how Edison's reproducers performed with dance music in the days before the introduction of electric recording. Once again, a companion video offers you a practical illustration worth far more than a proverbial thousand of my words. We already discussed the Standard and Long Playing reproducers in sufficient detail in Part I, but I promised you some more about the Dance model, so here it is. The last reproducer in the family, the New Standard/Edisonic, will need to be patient until the next (and last) article.

In case you're wondering, musical considerations actually do provide a method to the madness of how this series is unfolding. First, to keep things comparable, I wanted to play the same recording with each reproducer, including the long play model. Edison issued only one record of dance music in the long-playing format, and I don't have that one, which, as you can imagine, is much more sought-after by collectors than, say, the one offering a collection of sacred hymns; accordingly, it's unusually hard to get and expensive even by the standards of these rarities. For that reason, in the preceding article I chose an orchestral selection that I do happen to have both in standard and long-playing format. That's good as far as it goes, but now a second consideration comes into play: orchestral music doesn't really show the Edison Dance reproducer in a proper light. As you'd expect from its name, that one is intended for dance music. Therefore, at this point, having demonstrated it, we'll retire the Long Play reproducer and turn our attention to the other three in popular music of their day.

[Dance Reproducer]

The Dance reproducer was introduced in 1926 to address the market's desire for more volume from dance records. To the basic design of the standard reproducer it added a larger, heavier floating weight and springs tensioning the stylus bar and, from above, the diaphragm, the latter spring accounting for the distinctive flange visible above the diaphragm housing. The company issued it as an accessory, never as standard equipment, and initially announced a list price of $19.50 in nickel, the sole finish offered at first, with antique and gold finish models expected to be made available later for $24.50. That was actually a pretty substantial sum, a healthy fraction of what one would spend to buy an entire Edison phonograph equipped with the standard issue reproducer, such as the Chalet table model for $95 or bottom-end London Upright for $100. I'm sure that factor goes a long way toward accounting for the relative infrequency with which Dance reproducers are encountered today.

In announcing the Dance model to the trade, Edison sought to address what the company called “the volume fad,” the public enthusiasm for greater, and greater control over, volume with radio electronics and the newly introduced (by Edison's competitors) electrical recordings. Edison had this to say: “It is called the Dance Reproducer because our experience indicates quite conclusively that volume is wanted principally for Dance Records by people who dance. Furthermore, this reproducer is constructed to give the greatest possible volume on loudly recorded Dance Records. On such records you will notice a vast increase in volume. On records, other than dance, the dfference in volume is not nearly so marked.”

[Bananas Sheet Music]

Well, what of it? How did the Dance Reproducer's performance compare with that of others in the Edison line? If we take the company at its word, it is at its best in dance music, and so, in the video, some dance music, and indeed iconic dance music, we shall have. One of the era's major hits, in fact: “Yes, We Have no Bananas”! It was recorded on May 18, 1923, a mere two months after the song was published and around three years before introduction of the Dance Reproducer, played by a tireless recording ensemble of the day, the Green Brothers Novelty Band. George Wilton Ballard does the honors singing the vocal chorus. Ballard had been a stalwart of the Edison label for years, recording myriad selections as soloist and in various ensembles. He also recorded for other labels, including, inter alia, discs for Victor, Columbia, Zonophone and cylinders for US Everlasting and Indestructible. The Greens were two xylophonists and a banjo player, although their group also variously included brass players, double bass, and saxophones, and with the introduction of electric recording the xylophones gave way to marimba. Possibly the band's most noteworthy achievement in a career spanning 1918 to 1939 was playing the background music for Walt Disney's “Steamboat Willie,” the 1928 debut cartoon of Mickey Mouse and among the first cartoon films with synchronized sound, but the group was heard in a long line of records for various labels, including not only Edison but also Victor, Columbia, Pathe, Vocalion, Emerson, and OKeh.

This record testifies to the song's popularity, as it is noticeably worn toward the center. Edison discs, with playing surfaces of a hard, durable material and reproduced with precision-ground diamond styli, are extremely resistant to wear, even with the heavy-tracking acoustic players for which they were designed; unless abused by playback with steel needles, they seldom show much sign of repeated playings. I chose this one not only because it was such a popular selection but actually also because it shows wear. Therefore, it provides the opportunity to test how well each of the reproducer designs deals with a heavily played, worn record groove. I think there's a consensus that the Dance Reproducer, to the extent it did achieve increased volume, did so at the cost of increased distortion relative to the standard model. It's time to let the reproducers speak for themselves once again, though, and as before you can be the judge: have a listen for yourself, and draw your conclusions accordingly.

___________________

Did you enjoy this article? You can support our free, advertising-free magazine with a small Paypal donation using the button below. Thank you![Love]

[Donate with Paypal!]

DISCLAIMER. TNT-Audio is a 100% independent magazine that neither accepts advertising from companies nor requires readers to register or pay for subscriptions. If you wish, you can support our independent reviews via a PayPal donation. After publication of reviews, the authors do not retain samples other than on long-term loan for further evaluation or comparison with later-received gear. Hence, all contents are written free of any “editorial” or “advertising” influence, and all reviews in this publication, positive or negative, reflect the independent opinions of their respective authors. TNT-Audio will publish all manufacturer responses, subject to the reviewer's right to reply in turn.

[Follow us on Facebook]

© Copyright 2025 David Hoehl - drh@tnt-audio.com - www.tnt-audio.com