Had to smile at this one ,we had one similar to yours about 10yr ago I was playing some old 78s just to try it out and my teenage sons went mad turn that noise down . I replied I cant 😂😂😂
Another Techmoan fan? He does some fascinating videos - I never realised that the discs wore out the needles, and not vice versa. And we get the theme music (Danse Macabre by Saint-Saens) to 'Jonathan Creek', too. Tidy. Joking aside, it is a beautiful bit of equipment. Thanks for sharing!
Your false assumption of cheapness is based on the fact that he hasn't fully wound it and uses an arguably inferior soundbox. As an owner of one with a No. 5B, I can tell you that a full wind keeps speed for 2 full sides. The frequency response of the No. 5B is roughly 30 Hz to almost 10 KHz which is pretty decent for an acoustic gramophone. The HMV 102 is known for its build quality and sound quality and is rather impressive for a portable with its only real disadvantage being lacking a volume control like some other portables have. Leave it to some rando with no content to be a snob I guess.
@@theantiquescollector2199 Yeah, a two-spring motor still beats it in regards to not having to wind as much but it is dang good as portables go. It has been my first gramophone and it has worked well. Most portables nowadays have cheap build quality but this most certainly does not. I've noticed this guy spouts his pedanticism and whatnot on a lot of antique phonograph/gramophone channels including Dyslexic Genius Hurt. Sure, a re-entrant horn would provide a fuller sound but the 102's horn is still decent for having to be crammed onto a portable and quite loud as well. I find even a soft tone needle isn't quiet enough for some incredibly loud records from the 30s and 40s. Luckily I did recently get some extra soft tone needles which should help with quieting further without having to stick socks in the horn.
@@pip5528 most likely some "expert" again, but i wholeheartedly agree with you, the 102 is really the best of the best, though one of my friends discovered there's actually an air leak in the tonearm causing it to lose bass, its the part going into the case transfering the sound into the horn, putting graphite grease on that joint where Its moving helps it and improves the bass, btw i have its later version (E model) in red :)
![เปิดใจ "อาจารย์เบียร์ คนตื่นธรรม" อดีตเคยสุดทุกทาง ถ้าใช้หนี้หมดไปบวชแน่ l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/IxeE0xVhy08/mqdefault.jpg)
I have same model, it's fantastic. Even acoustic recordings sound great in that machine.
the phonograph is in a superb state of preservation.
Had to smile at this one ,we had one similar to yours about 10yr ago I was playing some old 78s just to try it out and my teenage sons went mad turn that noise down . I replied I cant 😂😂😂
Another Techmoan fan? He does some fascinating videos - I never realised that the discs wore out the needles, and not vice versa.
And we get the theme music (Danse Macabre by Saint-Saens) to 'Jonathan Creek', too. Tidy.
Joking aside, it is a beautiful bit of equipment. Thanks for sharing!
This is great
That’s a cool vintage object you own 😉👍📻
It still works well too!!.. Score!!..
The green felt isn't original, also the circlip that holds the platter is missing.
I had removed the circlip to take it off my fat fingers got in the way of the video though.
@@diecastrescue3597 ohh
Inspired by Techmoan? I like it!
Yes I watched his video and thought after a minute or two "hang on I have one of those!"
It looks like new!
Looks to be in very nice original condition...
Get yourself a real gramophone one that has better frequency response and keeps speed....unlike ur cheap portable
Your false assumption of cheapness is based on the fact that he hasn't fully wound it and uses an arguably inferior soundbox. As an owner of one with a No. 5B, I can tell you that a full wind keeps speed for 2 full sides. The frequency response of the No. 5B is roughly 30 Hz to almost 10 KHz which is pretty decent for an acoustic gramophone. The HMV 102 is known for its build quality and sound quality and is rather impressive for a portable with its only real disadvantage being lacking a volume control like some other portables have. Leave it to some rando with no content to be a snob I guess.
cheap portable? 102's are a rolls royce of portables, look up some info about them before you call them "cheap". damn people are stupid.
PLUS if you actually listened to him, he said he DID NOT wind it up fully..
@@theantiquescollector2199 Yeah, a two-spring motor still beats it in regards to not having to wind as much but it is dang good as portables go. It has been my first gramophone and it has worked well. Most portables nowadays have cheap build quality but this most certainly does not. I've noticed this guy spouts his pedanticism and whatnot on a lot of antique phonograph/gramophone channels including Dyslexic Genius Hurt. Sure, a re-entrant horn would provide a fuller sound but the 102's horn is still decent for having to be crammed onto a portable and quite loud as well. I find even a soft tone needle isn't quiet enough for some incredibly loud records from the 30s and 40s. Luckily I did recently get some extra soft tone needles which should help with quieting further without having to stick socks in the horn.
@@pip5528 most likely some "expert" again, but i wholeheartedly agree with you, the 102 is really the best of the best, though one of my friends discovered there's actually an air leak in the tonearm causing it to lose bass, its the part going into the case transfering the sound into the horn, putting graphite grease on that joint where Its moving helps it and improves the bass, btw i have its later version (E model) in red :)